Abortion is generally immoral.
Debate Rounds (3)
In this debate, I will prove abortion is generally immoral. Generally meaning in most cases.
1. In the first round, state you opening case, in the last write nothing more than "thanks for the debate", this gives us an equal amount of rounds to debate. (only applies to opponent.
2. no plagiarism
3. no personal attacks
4. no profanity.
5. No complaining in the comment section
If any of the rules are broken, the culprit shall recieve a 7 point deduction.
Immorality of Abortion
a Persuasive Thesis Statement on, "Abortion is generally immoral":
Even though That abortion is generally immoral. , I believe it should be legal if the mother is mentally unable to cope with the idea of having a child and can't deal with the responsibilities of the baby OR she can't go through the pregnancy (Whether it is psychological or biological). However at the same time, I don't think you should be able to abort a child every time you have unprotected sex. because Pregnancy always has some form of risk of problems. The causes could be something you currently have or have developed. High blood pressure, kidney problems and autoimmune disorders can risk the probability of loss when it comes to delivery of the baby. and "The findings are of concern because attention problems and anxiety and depression have been shown to affect peer relationships, academic performance, and future well-being of children," says Frederica Perera, DrPH, PhD, director of the Columbia Center. This means that the mother who is psychologically unable to care for the baby will have issues and problems raising the baby..
Thank you for accepting this debate. Now to begin.
"Even though That abortion is generally immoral. "
This is a clear cut concession. Thank you for the nice, respectful forfeit.
For the rest of the arguments, just because the baby may not have great health does not give you the right to kill it.
A fetus is a human because it has the 7 things required to be a living human. To be living, it needs homostatis, orginization, metabolism, growth, adaption, response to stimuli and reproduction.  A fetus contains all of these, thus being a human. This human is also innocent, since it is not yet born. Since the child didn't do anything wrong, and it is living, it is unjust to kill it, and thus immoral.
There are various reasons why people abort. The main ones are usually unwanted pregnancy and rape. For unwanted, it is their fault for having unsafe sex. Furthermore they can put it up for adoption. For rape, either way the person will recieve trauma, regardless if they give birth to the child or not. So it is unjust to kill it, and better to put it up for adoption or raise it.
There is no valid reason to which why you should kill a innocent being. Because of such, abortion is immoral in most cases.
Roe V. Wade Summary
The court case states that in the first trimester (first three months) of the pregnancy that aborting the baby is protected under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States of America. The states can't prohibit an abortion. You have the right of privacy to do what you want to your body.
In one to two weeks, your body is preparing for ovulation. Ovulation, usually, takes eleven to twelve days for most women. Anywhere within six to twleve days, the female body is now entering the embryonic stage. In week three, the embryo is beginning to develop the spinal cord, brain and heart, but within that time peroid, the embryo's spinal cord, brain and heart aren't fully developed which means it isn't really alive.
With all of that said, I conclude that within the first trimester or the first three weeks of pregancy; the embryo isn't really fully alive which doesn't (in that time period) make it human. So, abortion within that timeframe, is moral and legal.
"The court case states that in the first trimester (first three months) of the pregnancy that aborting the baby is protected under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States of America. The states can't prohibit an abortion. You have the right of privacy to do what you want to your body."
This debate is about whether it is moral, not if it should be banned. Furthermore, you took this from wikipedia, which is unreliable. Also, technically, it is not your body, it is someone else's body, but not yet developped.
"In one to two weeks, your body is preparing for ovulation. Ovulation, usually, takes eleven to twelve days for most women. Anywhere within six to twleve days, the female body is now entering the embryonic stage. In week three, the embryo is beginning to develop the spinal cord, brain and heart, but within that time peroid, the embryo's spinal cord, brain and heart aren't fully developed which means it isn't really alive. "
First of all, your source has little relation to your argument. Secondly, it is alive, just underdevelopped. During ovulation, it still contains the 7 requirements to be living, thus living and human. Since it is innocent, and alive, it is immoral to kill it.
"With all of that said, I conclude that within the first trimester or the first three weeks of pregancy; the embryo isn't really fully alive which doesn't (in that time period) make it human. So, abortion within that timeframe, is moral and legal. "
Let us assume that in that period, it is unalive (even though it is proven it is alive). This is only 1 time frame, out of the 9 months, so for the rest of the time, it is immoral. The debate is whether or not it is GENERALLY immoral, meaning most of the time. So most of the time is it immoral.
My argument dropped my argument regarding adoption. Instead of killing an innocent human, you could put it up for adoption.
Also, abortion is dangerous.
"• One death per every 530,000 abortions if you are at eight weeks or less
• One death per 17,000 abortions for pregnancies at 16–20 weeks
• One death per 6,000 abortions at 21 weeks and more." 
So as you can see, you are giving the risk to harm yourself while killing an innocent child. There are various other safe, appropriate alternatives such as adoption. This allows the child to at least live in a loving family, and keeps the mother safer.
In conclusion, in most cases abortion is killing an innocent child. Furthermore, it is also dangerous for the mother. There are safer, appropriate ways to save both the mother and the child. Since the mother ignores these alternatives, and kills an innocent child for her own personal needs, it is immoral. My opponent only explained how it should be legal. Furthermore, he ignores how he conceded in round 1. I would like to remind him he can no longer debate as agreed upon in the rules. If he does, he shall experiance the 7 point forfeit. Thank you for the debate.
Okay, let me ask you this.
What IF the mother can't biologically or psychologically handle the pregnancy?
I say that at that moment; the abortion is then moral. I am not saying that people should abuse the abortions. I am saying that abortion is only moral if there are problems with the mother she thought she didn't have until the pregnancy occured.
Do you understand what I am trying to say?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Actionsspeak 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||4||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro gave alot more factual/objective information which persuaded me greatly, and he also posted arguments through the debate Con closed with a miserable rebuttal and didn't extend or defend any points previously stated in the debate. Con basically closed with a forfeit, and i'm deducting conduct, if you don't feel like closing the end round of an argument then don't do it, don't instead make a 2-questions (which can't be answered since the debate would then be over.) and 2 sentence post that didn't pertain to the keyword: generally not possibly.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.