The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
8 Points

Abortion is MURDER!

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/19/2016 Category: People
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 467 times Debate No: 86894
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (2)




The abortion debate has been ongoing for a very long time. There are many perspectives to the matter, but all in all it always opposes to 2 sides of the story, pro-abortion or anti-abortion. I will now state my perspective of the matter, hoping for a good debate opponent to accept the challenge. Basically, I see abortion as murder and to take another human being's life, whether it being a foetus or a living baby i still think it is the same principal, it is murder. And yes my dear opponent, i know that in some extreme cases such as rape, it is not always fitting for a person to have the baby, but in these extreme cases there is special case solutions. It is for instance possible to take prevention pills for the female after she has been raped or has had sex that might lead to a baby. So this is not an argument that is possible to make from your side. From 1973 through 2011, nearly 53 million legal abortions has been performed in the United States " an average of about 1.4 million abortions per year. At 2008 abortion rates, three in ten US women will have an abortion before age 45. That is a lot of lives STOLEN from the world , do you really not see it as morally extreme incorrect to take the opportunity of a life from a living person? Imagine if that baby would have become the most influential person that has ever lived. Of course that example is quite extreme, but the principal remains the same. To take the life of a foetus that had the potential to become something is and will always be extremely morally incorrect.


Thank you for allowing me more experience in this topic, as I am beginning to become skilled in the abortion debate. I look forward to the rest of this debate.

It is the The topic we are debating today is whether or not the abortion is moral and should be legal in the United States. The United States has already risen over the religious institutions in legalizing gay marriage, which is a very big step in the direction of the free mind and body movement. Considering that they have already stated that everyone should have the right to do what they want with their body, shouldn't abortion be legal also? I would consider the baby, part of the mother until the umbilical cord is cut. Until then the baby is basically a parasite, feeding off the strength of the mother. I will go more in depth into this later on in the debate.

My second point is that every child should have the right to grow up in a strong household. Some of the factors that would make up a strong household would be parents and love, although those are just some of them, they make up the epitome of a good household. A child growing up without a good household is over twice as likely to develop psychotic tendencies and have mental disorders.

I would like to now point out that by requesting an abortion, the mother is stating that she cannot care for, does not want, or cannot have the child inside her body. For better or for worse this puts the child without love if it comes into this world. It will be more likely to be bullied, and abused, by peers at school or by the mother. Or the child could be put into an orphanage, a drain on the system, never knowing its mother, depressed and lonely. Do you want this fate for a child?

This picture would not be complete without a father of course. Whether it is a teen pregnancy and the father simply denies the girl, to a marriage where both the mother and the father do not want the baby, accidents to happen. Because birth control is never 100% effective, we should not, and have a moral responsibility not to make abortions illegal. Until we can say that you will not get a baby is you use this super condem (or any other form of 100% effective birth control), we should not take abortions away.

Why is this pro lifers might ask? Well it is because, we need to offer the women a foolproof option of getting rid of a child, that will not be loved, cared for and was a stake, weather by not having it made in the first place, or by cutting it off before it is born. We should be attempting as a society to produce children that are wholesome and grow up in a happy and healthy household, with both parents who care for them, as that will produce the best results for a society to grow. We as an advanced society should be promoting the sexual lifestyles of to individuals without allowing a chance of a baby to come in and figuratively and actually wrecking their lives, and their finances.

It is also a huge risk to the women. The number of women who get abortions does not change when it goes from being legal to illegal, or vice versa. The only thing that changes is more women die. Every year, 78,000 women die from unsafe abortions. This is because sometimes women cannot have the baby because of ridicule, it is unsafe or numerous other reasons. The women needs to not have said baby so she attempts to take it out without an abortion, which almost always leads to injury or death.

Reproductive restrictions do not end with abortion. Many people also argue that contraception itself is wrong"another mainly-religious philosophy"and will deny women the protection they need based on this belief. There are legislative acts that allow actual pharmacists to deny women their birth control because of their beliefs; does this not violate the Hippocratic Oath, especially if thousands of women are on birth control because their very lives depend on it (see above point)? Also, since it is mybelief that men should not rape women, if I were a pharmacist, would I have a right to deny a man his Viagra just in case he uses it to rape? You never know.

This moves me onto my final point for this speech. This is that most newly weds and new couples, simply cannot afford to care for a baby. Having another member of the family is extremely expensive (I am sure there are stats on this, but without Internet, I cannot check them), and it should not be forced on people.

Governments should stay out of the bedroom. Like China's one child policy, to restrict population growth, do we need a policy that does not allow us to control our population, and have children being born without love, or caring parents?

It is for these reasons that I do believe that this resolution Resolved that the United States Government should make abortion illegal, must and will fall. Thank you and have a great day! I look forward to my opponent's argument.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting my debate. You have some good and free minded points, but you fail to see some very important things in your arguments. Unfortunately in this world everything is not all butterflies and good times, there are some rough points to life. Some people are unfortunate to be born in a poor household, where they might face various issues, for instance the point you make with the family not having the resources to take care of the baby. This problem is unfortunately something that is going to sustain until the end of humanity. It is not a valid reason for people not to have the baby that has been put onto their lives. When a person feels like the child is a burden, the person should not literally kill the baby. Even though the baby is not going to receive the best and rich life, that is how life works and the people involved just has to accept that. In Africa where there is extreme poverty, they still reproduce even though they will have a very rough time taking care of the baby, but they still do it and in a lot of cases that child grows up and lives on. That is how life works, it cannot all be a fairy tale.

You also state that some women giving birth go on to have serious injuries or end up dying, and then again, that is just how life works, we as people do not have the right to be "god" and to decide which people has the right of a life. Of course there will always be some downsides to the right things in life, but that is how life is and we as a society just have to accept that life is not perfect and we are not god.


Thank you for your rebuttals, and I applaud you on staying away from my strengths in the art of debating, and identifying them before the debate. I will now first like to defeat any religious arguments on this debate with this fact:

Although the Catholic and Lutheran churches oppose abortion, more of their members believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases versus illegal in all or most cases (51% vs. 45%, Lutheran; 48% vs. 45%, Catholic). [1] This fact would defeat any religious arguments because it states that religious churches, do not actually oppose legalizing abortion.

Now that I have defeated any religious arguments I would now like to move on to rebuttals.

I"m probably not going to convince you that a fetus isn"t a life, as that"s basically the most intractable part of this whole debate, so I"ll be brief. A fetus can"t survive on its own. It is fully dependent on its mother"s body, unlike born human beings. Even if a fetus was alive, the "right to life" doesn"t imply a right to use somebody else"s body. People have the right to refuse to donate their organs, for example, even if doing so would save somebody else"s life. The "right to life" also doesn"t imply a right to live by threatening somebody else's life. Bearing children is always a threat the life of the mother. A "right to life" is, at the end of the day, a right to not have somebody else"s will imposed upon your body. Do women not have this right as well?

In your rebuttals you stated that you would rather have a child alive and in an orphanage. This implies that the only reason a woman would want to get an abortion is to avoid raising a child, and that isn"t the case. Depending on the circumstances, the mere act of having a child in a hospital can cost between $3,000 and $37,000 in the United States. Giving birth is dangerous, too: In the United States, pregnancy complications are the sixth most common cause of death for women between the ages of 20 and 34.

Even before birth, there are costs to pregnancy. In addition to the whole "carrying another human being around in your stomach for nine months" thing, many women, particularly teens, are shunned and shamed for their pregnancies " not only by friends, families, employers, and classmates, but also by advertisements in the subway. There's also the risk of violent retribution from abusive partners and parents. In short, there are a lot of reasons a woman might seek an abortion. Adoption doesn"t address all of them.

Now I will move on to my constructive speech. A woman's risk of dying from having an abortion is 0.6 in 100,000, while the risk of dying from giving birth is around 14 times higher (8.8 in 100,000). [2] The mortality rate of a colonoscopy is more than 40 times greater than that of an abortion.[3]

The US Supreme Court has declared abortion to be a "fundamental right" guaranteed by the US Constitution. The landmark abortion case Roe v. Wade, decided on Jan. 22, 1973 in favor of abortion rights, remains the law of the land. The 7-2 decision stated that the Constitution gives "a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy," and that "This right of privacy... is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. [4]

Women who receive abortions are less likely to suffer mental health problems than women denied abortions. A Sep. 2013 peer-reviewed study comparing the mental health of women who received abortions to women denied abortions found that women who were denied abortions "felt more regret and anger" and "less relief and happiness" than women who had abortions. The same study also found that 95% of women who received abortions "felt it was the right decision" a week after the procedure. [5] Studies by the American Psychological Association (APA), the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges (AMRC), and researchers at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health all concluded that purported links between abortion and mental health problems are unfounded. [6]

Women who are denied abortions are more likely to become unemployed, to be on public welfare, to be below the poverty line, and to become victims of domestic violence. A University of California at San Francisco study found that women who were turned away from abortion clinics (because they had passed the gestational limit imposed by the clinic) were three times more likely to be below the poverty level two years later than women who were able to obtain abortions. 76% of the "turnaways" ended up on unemployment benefits, compared with 44% of the women who had abortions. The same study found that women unable to obtain abortions were more likely to stay in a relationship with an abusive partner than women who had an abortion, and were more than twice as likely to become victims of domestic violence. [7] [8]

Abortion reduces crime. According to a study co-written by Freakonomics co-author Steven D. Levitt, PhD, and published in the peer-reviewed Quarterly Journal of Economics, "legalized abortion has contributed significantly to recent crime reductions." Around 18 years after abortion was legalized, crime rates began to drop abruptly, and crime rates dropped earlier in states that allowed abortion earlier. Because "women who have abortions are those most at risk to give birth to children who would engage in criminal activity," and women who had control over the timing of childbearing were more likely to raise children in optimal environments, crime is reduced when there is access to legal abortion. [9]

It is for the reasons that I have stated above, and in my previous speech that I would encourage a vote against the resolution. I look forward to my opponents rebuttals and speech in the next round. Below you will see a list of the resources that I have used to write my rebuttals and speech. Thank you for your time.

[1]Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, US Religious Landscape Survey: Religious Beliefs and Practices: Diverse and Politically Relevant,, June 2008
[2]E.G. Raymond and D.A. Grimes, "The Comparative Safety of Legal Induced Abortion and Childbirth in the United States," Obstetrics and Gynecology, Feb. 2012
[3]American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and American Medical Association, "Brief of Amici Curiae [in Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Surgical Health Services et al. v. Attorney General Gregory Abbot et al.],", Dec. 19, 2013
[4]Roe v. Wade (342 KB) , US Supreme Court,, Jan. 22, 1973
[5]Corinne H. Rocca, Katrina Kimport, et al., "Women's Emotions One Week after Receiving or Being Denied an Abortion in the United States," Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, Sep. 2013
[6]Susan A. Cohen, "Still True: Abortion Does Not Increase Women"s Risk of Mental Health Problems," Guttmacher Policy Review, Spring 2013
[7]Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH), University of California at San Francisco, "Turnaway Study," (accessed Apr. 22, 2014)
[8]Annalee Newitz, "What Happens to Women Denied Abortions? This Is the First Scientific Study to Find Out,", Nov. 13, 2012
[9]John J. Donohue, and Steven D. Levitt, "The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 2001 (Despite admitting to an error in one of this study's tables, Levitt has stated that "the story we put forth in the paper is not materially changed by the coding error." See Steven D. Levitt, "Everything in Freakonomics Is Wrong!,", Nov. 28, 2005)
Debate Round No. 2


Americandick forfeited this round.


Extend and conclude
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Stonehe4rt 8 months ago
Yes but your entire debate is about how children shouldn't have to grow up in a tough life, but even if the mother can't provide for the child she can put them in adoption. Where they have the chance of life and happiness instead of killing them. What is the point behind killing a child, especially if one is Atheist, if one was religious and basing it off of morals it would be more apt to think that the child will live fine in the next life or what not but if your Atheist you take every chance the child has at life from the start and even if it had a hard life people have gotten over their pasts and had happy lives, an example would be a friend of mine's mother was raped by her own father and beaten by her brothers but she got over that and married a man and had two great kids. Just because life can be hard doesn't mean to kill someone and end it all with regrets.
Posted by minddrag 8 months ago
Read my debate and my arguements stoneheart andu will quickly come to realize why I state what I do
Posted by Stonehe4rt 8 months ago
Well I then don't put this in mind when thinking about the debate, but I just want to know Mind drags reasoning for this morally evil act. How can you consider a child who can kick and crave not alive? How can you kill it? Where is the pro choice in that? It's obviously wrong.
Posted by Reformist 8 months ago
Afraid minddrag is not post arguement s that can be used in a debate. Especially in a noob debate
Posted by Stonehe4rt 8 months ago
I'm sadden that people see Babies during late term abortion as parasites. The mother pushes the baby almost all the way out, a few seconds from being born, but leaves the child's head in so it is not counted as being born yet, the baby who can move its legs and arms is then killed by a sharp utensil stabbing into its brain stem. If that isn't murder I don't know what is, oh but it's okay they aren't human because they have a cord that they use to live. So people on blood transfusions or anything that is giving them nutrition from others aren't human? 10/10. Also a babies heart develops at 1-2 weeks old, so if people can be considered dead when the heart stops then why aren't they alive when it begins? And for the child, of the mother doesn't want him that badly put him up for adoption, a couple who can't have kids would love that.
Posted by Stonehe4rt 8 months ago
Lol I'm just a commenter who is stating his opinion and questions of how Abortion isn't murder. It's your job to prove otherwise. What I say doesn't matter as I am not the one debating.
Posted by minddrag 8 months ago
Hey, Hey, Hey stoneheart... Go make your own debate and shut it please!
Posted by Stonehe4rt 8 months ago
Well firstly Abortion isnt risk free either. Just like actual birth it is dangerous. Second it is not the child's fault that you got knocked up but yours, doesnt mean you can kill the child. Third just because the kid may have a bad life does it make it right to kill the child because that is no different from saying every poor person who is depressed right now with a poor life should die. Fourthly, Abortion is much more cruel than you may think, Many Abortions of late term had the women push the baby out all the way until only the head remains inside. The count this as still "abortion" since the baby hasnt been "born" yet out of the mothers body. The Doctor then takes a sharp nice and stabs into the brain stem of the baby. That is freaking MURDER. Fifthly, The baby develops a heart at one-two weeks, if someone is counted as dead when their heart stops then why arent we alive when it forms? So if you are going to abort your child, do it before the first week otherwise you are killing them just because you were too lazy to go to the hospital to get the egg removed. Six, The developer who made Abortion Legal was a woman named Mary, She came from Germany a little after Hitler died and all that. She was a Nazi who was attempting Eugenics which is depopulation of those they see with lesser genes. Her goal was to propagandize it to the poorer and darker skin and cut the population down. Today we can see she was successful with her stealthy GENOCIDE of INFANTS, Black women end with 5 times more abortions due to the propaganda and lack of education in the impoverished where they honestly believe that the child isnt alive yet, which is 100% a lie. Abortion was designed to kill, and weed out those they deem unwanted. It is evil and Indeed MURDER.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by U.n 7 months ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Hylian_3000 7 months ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Great debate overall! Conduct: Con forfeited last round, S&G: Minor spelling errors from Con Arguments: Overall, I felt like Pro had better arguments. He thoroughly explained his points and provided lots of evidence to further prove his point. Con had some good arguments too, but I felt like Pro did a good job countering those arguments. Since Con forfeited in the last round, many of Pro's arguments were left standing, Sources: Pro was the only one to use sources.