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

Abortion is ungodly

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/23/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 964 times Debate No: 87082
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (1)




To clarify this is the first debate I am engaging in on this website so I hope for it to be a good one and please forgive my inexperience using this website.

To start this debate off I would like to clarify my stance, I believe that abortion is a crime as it is ungodly in its essence and I do not believe this too be an opinion but a fact.
The definition of abortion that I will be using for this debate is the following: 'the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks.'.
For decades discussions have been going on as to whether or not abortion is a crime or not, hundreds of pro-life groups have protested all around the world against the legality of abortion.
My personal opinion on abortion is that it equates too murder as you are ending a potential for human life and its infinite capabilities to develop as an individual. Furthermore a pro-argument that is often brought up is the cases in which women are impregnated in cases of rape/non-consensual sex, but I do not believe it is necessary too have an abortion as there are preventive methods post sex such as the morning after pill and prevention pills. Whether or not these pills should be allowed is a debate for itself though. In cases in which the sex was completely consensual even if it was in an intoxicated state men and women a like should accept responsibility for their actions, as they made the decision to engage in sexual intercourse and it should not affect another life. In the United States of America since 1973 over 50 million abortions have taken place , which means that more than 50 million lives have been stolen, what ever the reason for the abortions might be.
All major monotheistic religions of our world prohibit murder under which abortion definitely counts reaffirming my beliefs in why abortion is wrong.
You can prevent pregnancy but as soon as the fetus begins forming anything that aims to terminate this new human being is against Gods word.

No human has the right to take another life even if it resides in the persons own stomach. We can never know what that child might have achieved if it had been granted its basic right to life, it could have turned into a heart surgeon, a future president or a scientist who made revolutionary discoveries.


Round 1: Presentation of debate, acceptance & opening statements
Round 2: Rebuttals
Round 3: Both sides defend their original arguments and round up

Stick to the arguments of your original statement in round 2 & 3


-A forfeit or concession is not allowed - be sure that you want to defend your side throughout the debate before accepting.

-No semantics, voting-conduct or trolling

-Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed without asking in the comments before posting first arguments. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed in the middle of the debate.


It is my opinion that abortion does equate to murder, but that is not the topic of this debate. The debate is about whether abortion is ungodly.

In the Old Testament - regarded as truth by the Jews, Christians, and Muslims alike - God justifies murder numerous times. In the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the biblical flood, the genocide of the Amalakites, and the various wars the Israelites fought we see that perticular circumstances can warrant the act of taking a life. In some cases, murder is religiously defensible and morally acceptable. Of specific note, I quote Samual 1:3

"Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.""

Though not directly said, it can also be understood that in killing the children and infant and women there would have been a number of fetuses as well. If the killing of children and infants is an action God condones then by definition it cannot be ungodly - though we must ask ourselves under what conditions is it acceptable.

I now present to you a list of birth defects and complications associated with pregnancy and childbirth. These are taken directly from the Center for Disease Control <;:

Anencephaly - a baby is born without parts of the skull, scalp and brain. The top of the head of the baby has no flesh and the interior of the head is exposed. There is no treatment or cure, and babies will die shortly after birth.
Occurrence: 1,200 per year.

Spina Bifida - a baby is born with a deformation to the lower spine which impairs the ability to walk, control bowels, mate, or bear children. The rate of survival depends upon the technology available - in most countries the baby dies in the first year.
Occurrence: 1,500 per year.

Microcephaly - a baby is born with an abnormally small skull and brain. This creates hearing, vision, and coordination problems as well as intellectual difficulties and seizures. There is no cure, and survival depends primarily upon the wealth of the parents - in most countries the baby dies within the first year.
Occurrence: 4,800 per year.

Craniofacial Dismorphia - a baby is born with deformities to the face and skull. In extreme cases (such as treacher collin's syndrome) surgery is needed for the baby to survive. Without surgery, these infants will die because they lack a nose or mouth through which to breath.
Occurrence: ~7,000 per year.

Additionally, 600 American women die each year from pregnancy related complications (globally it is more than 600 per day). Pregnant mothers with disorders such as hemophilia, asthma, diabetes, or uterine fibroids are at an increased risk of dying because of pregnancy complications and in these situations doctors recommend abortions to save the life of the mother. It is also a growing practice when a mother is pregnant with multiple babies (twins, triplets, etc) to abort one fetus but keep another - this is related to the complications and medical risks of multi-fetus births which could result in all fetuses dying.

It is because of information like this that the National Right to Life Committee (a Pro-Life group) issued a statement saying that its position is "to allow abortion if necessary to prevent the death of the mother." (

It is with this in mind that I say that abortion can be considered, at times and in extreme circumstances, to be a godly action and a mercy. To say that abortion is ungodly is to say that God Itself has behaved in an ungodly manner. To say abortion is ungodly is to say that abortion is never a mercy. To say that abortion is ungodly is to say that a mother should be forced to give birth to a deformed child and watch it die in her arms only moments later.

I say that in these circumstances abortion is in the best interest of the parents and the child, and that an abortion can save a life. Just because abortion is murder does not mean that it is fully unjustified, amoral, or ungodly.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for your response whooplaah, I find that you bring up some very interesting arguments and I appreciate your focus on the godly part.

The times in which you mention gods justification of murder it is important to remember that all the examples provided where examples in which god himself committed murder which can be justified, especially when taking the perspective of someone from that day and age in which the sins committed by those punished where punishable with death.
If we try to portray this onto the justification of children and infants then we must remember the situations these children where in e.g. the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah which now are synonymous with sin and sexual deviation in which god might have seen it more fitting for the children to never see the light of day. Of course I can not decisively say what exactly god had in mind, but I can read the different sources and form my own opinions and views based upon them.

Even though Samuel 1:3 calls for the destruction of Amalek, this is again a specific cased called for by God and not a human decision, even though the decision to follow through with the destruction was human which shows that the times in which religious texts make murder permissible is under direction of god and not under your own jurisdiction.

The Bible, the Q'uran and the Torah all have examples directly relating to the murder of infants born as well as unborn.
While the Bible (New Testament specifically) does not address the issue of abortion directly many writers state that early Christians condemned abortion at any stage of the pregnancy as a grave sin. The Didache prohibits abortion in its second chapter.
Islamic views on abortion are shaped by the Hadiths :
Allah's Apostle gave the judgment that a male or female slave should be given in Qisas for an abortion case of a woman from the tribe of Bani Lihyan (as blood money for the fetus) but the lady on whom the penalty had been imposed died, so the Prophets ordered that her property be inherited by her offspring and her husband and that the penalty be paid by her Asaba.

Hadith"Sahih al-Bukhari 8.732, Narrated Abu Hurairah
Umar bin Al-Khattab asked (the people) about the Imlas of a woman, i.e., a woman who has an abortion because of having been beaten on her abdomen, saying, "Who among you has heard anything about it from the Prophet?" I said, "I did." He said, "What is that?" I said, "I heard the Prophet saying, 'Its Diya (blood money) is either a male or a female slave.'" Umar said, "Do not leave till you present witness in support of your statement." So I went out, and found Muhammad bin Maslama. I brought him, and he bore witness with me that he had heard the Prophet saying, "Its Diya (blood money) is either a male slave or a female slave."

Hadith"Sahih Bukhari 9.420, Narrated Mughira ibn Shu'ba
Ibn Abbas said: "Umar asked about the decision of the Prophet (peace be upon him) about that (i.e. abortion) Haml ibn Malik ibn an-Nabighah got up and said: I was between two women. One of them struck another with a tent-pole killing both her and what was in her womb. So the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) gave judgment that the blood-wit for the unborn child should be a male or a female slave of the best quality and that she should be killed."

Hadith"Abu Dawood 4555, Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab

Muslim scholars have stated that even in cases of rape the child is still a legitimate one and it is thus sinful to kill it.

The Torah does not have any specific information regarding abortion but does give us information on still-birth and miscarriage due to violent action which can be equated to modern day abortion. Exodus 21:22"25 And if men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that her child is born (i.e., either "born alive" or "stillborn", depending on the interpretation), and yet no harm follows, he shall be surely fined ... But if any harm follow, then thou shalt give life for life ...
Even though it does not mention intervention from the mother herself I believe it is safe to assume that the same would count for her.

Most religious texts do not directly address abortion specifically most likely due to the fact that abortion pre-birth was not possible in the way that it is today, but they do give information on outside intervention on pregnancy to which I would count a mother deliberately killing her own child.

When looking at the source from the CDC the numbers they provide are very minuscule compared to the 40-50 million abortions performed every single year and the question arises whether or not we should allow the killing of up to 50 million innocents every year to allow a few thousand that would most likely die shortly after birth because of this minority.

While I personally do agree that it could be beneficial to perform abortion in such cases as where the mothers life depends on it, the focus of the debate is on the godly part more than the moral part. Due to this murder is still a sin and no human should have the right to take another another human life and that we as humans can not judge over life.


One key difference between God and man is that God can, by definition of god, predict the future with 100% accuracy. When God ordered Saul and the Israelites to strike Amalek and the Amalekites down (even their women, children, and infants) he had the ability to foresee all of the possible consequences of His actions. Manking lacks this ability, which is why when man emulates God man might be performing a sin.

To the Israelites and early Christians predicting success of births was an impossibility. Even the sex of an infant was impossible to predict, let alone whether any birth defects or complications would arise, or whether low-income parents would raise a more criminally inclined child. They did not have the medical or scientific vocabulary to understand hemophilia or asthma and how these conditions affect the survival rate of a mother or her infant. There was no way for humans, during this time in history, to judge whether it would be more or less beneficial to abort a pregnancy.

With advances in science and medicine we can now do this. Doctors can use ultrasounds, genetic history, blood tests, and a host of machines to determine the odds of a fetus living, dying, or endangering a mother.

When a mother in the 100 AD's decided to get an abortion, she did so based upon how she felt. There were no facts, there was no way of knowing, it was simply fear or cowardice or anger. When a mother in the 2010 AD's decides, she has statistical grounds to base her decision on. It isn't just that she is afraid or scared or angry, but that science has concluded that there is a 100% chance that this baby has anencephaly, will be born without a brain, and will die within an hour of being born.

I say this as a counter to the verses in the bible that outright forbid abortions. Times and technology have changed since those orders were given, and we should interpret them through the lens of what mankind can now do. We were once blind to the future, but now we can predict it with surprising accuracy. We are not yet god-like in our accuracy, but we are much closer.

We both agree that abortion is murder, and we agree that in certain circumstances it is morally acceptable, but it seems that we are disagreeing upon what "godly" means.

Can something only be considered godly if it is always good? If so, then nothing we can conceive of would be godly (except God Itself). Life is good and godly, unless that life is Satan's and dedicated to the eradication of all things good. Mercy is good and godly, unless in sparing The Joker we find multitudes dying and evil spreading. Forgiveness is good and godly, unless it is used in such abundance that there is no consequence or punishment for any evil action. Truth is good and godly, unless it is so harsh as to cause trauma and drive a person to suicide.

Godly cannot be a term reserved for something that is always good. Likewise, something ungodly cannot be reserved for an action that is always evil. Vengeance is evil and ungodly, unless it is the vengeance that God commanded Saul take against Amalek. Lying is evil and ungodly, unless it is told in witness protection to protect the innocent from the evil that seeks to find them. Murder is evil and ungodly, unless it is the murder of a murderer who would do more harm if left alive. Abortion is evil and ungodly, unless it saves the life of a twin's sibling or a mother.

I say this to defend my previous statements. Abortions performed as a mercy upon a mother, or in the defense of an unborn sibling, are godly in the same way as defending one's wife or child from an adult who aims to do harm.

We can say that God is godly, by definition. Anything that God does, in any circumstance, for any reason (however incomprehensible) must be godly. This is why the destruction of all the babies in Sodom and Gomorrah was godly. It is why the babies that died in the flood of Noah were killed in a godly way. It is why the babies that died at the hands of the Israelites (against Amalek) died a godly death. God commanded and orchestrated events so that these babies died.

Now if we say that God designed the human body, the we can conclude that the functions of the human body are in accordance with how God designed them. If we can accept that statement the we must accept that God - or more specifically, how God designed the womb - results in approximately 1.05 million abortions every day.

According to the US National Library of Medicine, "Around half of all fertilized eggs die and are lost (aborted) spontaneously, usually before the woman knows she is pregnant. Among women who know they are pregnant, 15 to 20 out of every 100 will have a miscarriage (baby dies after week 20)." This means that if we consider a baby alive at the point of conception, only 30% of babies are born. This means that for every baby that survives until birth - including those with deformities that result in immediate death afterward - for every baby that is born there are 3 babies that died inside the womb. Some of these babies were just a fertilized egg, others were a 3rd trimester fetus. Every day 350,000 babies are born, and over 1,000,000 died of natural causes in the womb.

Now this information might not quite mesh with the definition of abortion used in the opening challenge (that an abortion must be intentional), but in a way, if we accept that God designed the womb, these are the result of God's actions. Because all things that God does are godly, one might even say that in the strictest definition of terms these are godly abortions.

Spontaneous (Naturally Occurring) Abortions
Debate Round No. 2


In round one I stated that abortion is ungodly and I still firmly believe that, as even though we might say that in some cases it can be mercy full we do not have information from god that this is true, but all three major religions strongly condemn murder no matter the circumstances. If we are too say that abortion can be mercy full in relation to a godly action it would be to make assumptions about things we do not fully understand as god is not a human and thus does not necessarily think like one. As said previously god himself has said that if a woman is pregnant and harm is done to her and the child dies life shall be payed with life which can be projected unto a mother killing her own child as well.
Over 50 million lives are stolen from us each year through abortion, and that is 50 million opportunities wasted.

As soon as the fetus begins its cycle of formation anything that is done to harm it can only be considered ungodly.
Even though anything can be godly it will only be so if done by god himself, and it is not to be decided by man if something is godly unless it is something that is expressed as godly by your religious beliefs.

God has given us the gift of choice and free will in our life which is why I personally do believe he can with hundred percent certainty predict the future, but he sees the different versions depending on which choices the humans make. In Judaism it is universally agreed upon, in Christianity it is also agreed upon but with slight differences depending if you are catholic , protestant or orthodox, and in Islam it is a debated topic depending on which scholar you ask. It is due to the fact that god knows the future that he can order the strike on Amalek and other events like that, as he knows how it will impact the world and whether or not this for the greater good.

It might be true that Israelite and early Christian women did not know how the child would turn out etc., it is important to remember that abortions where very rare due to the dangers associated with them. The only real way to stand with a result like abortion in those days was to get rid of the child post birth, even if there where option to do abortions these numbered very few and where not very accurate or trustworthy. Another factor is that like throughout most of history there has always been a very big social stigma around abortion and getting rid of your child which in those days was even more than now or say 100 years ago.

You say we can outright forget parts of religious texts because they have become outdated and irrelevant due to for example scientific progress. If we think like this we might drop religion completely as you cannot disregard sections of the original texts.

Anything god does is automatically godly, and god is not good or evil as those are both human terms that cannot apply to the creator as he is above human morals and ethics. Gods action as far as we can be concerned are always aiming towards a greater good even if it not be immediately good in our eyes.

We cannot say that abortion that saves the mothers life or a siblings life is godly as there are no texts or references to god doing, and we cannot make assumptions as to how god would act based upon our emotions. It is not the same as protecting your child or wife from a attack, as this has been permitted by god himself on multiple occasions.

With the gift of choice and free will there come certain challenges that must be mastered in life in order to prove yourself for heaven.

God has designed the human body and its functions, but there is a very big difference between what you call a godly abortion and a medical abortion. Again if we assume that god is all knowing and that he specifically cares for the natural abortions it would still not be relevant to human abortion as a human is not all knowing and does not know the consequences nor does she have the right to take another human life. Saying natural abortion can in anyway justify medical abortion is almost to say natural deaths justify murder
I believe through this debate we have come to agree upon most things, the main thing still being whether abortion in specific cases where it can save another humans life could be godly and permitted by god.
My final thoughts are still that no human has the right to take another humans life, and that we as humans are not in a position to decide whether or not a baby should live or die but I am inclined to agree that in cases where the mothers life is on the line as most religions consider the mother to be the source of the life making her more important. On the other hand there have been countless examples of humans that have been declared unfit for human life to live for many years to come, some even to the full extent that it has to offer.

To conclude I believe natural abortion to be godly due to it being directly influenced by god, while medical abortion is ungodly as we can not know that god would approve of it.


Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.
Psalm 82:4

And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?
Quran 4:75

God demands of his people that we should protect those in need, that we should do what is in our power to deliver mercy, end suffering, and promote life. Many times these phrases are used to say, "This is why we should protect the baby," but they are just as justifiable when used by those who say, "This is why we should protect the mother."

Pregnancy is not a simple matter. A woman does not just become pregnant, wait 9 months, and then give birth to a healthy child. A fertilized egg does not just float down a tube, attach to a wall, and then blossom into a baby. Biology is much more complex that this, and to fully evaluate the consequences of interfering in this system by inducing an abortion we must fully appreciate the system as it is naturally.

For every fertile egg that grows into a baby, 3 fertilized eggs have died of natural causes inside the womb. For every 10 babies that are born healthy, 2 more are still born (fully formed in the womb, but dead before birth), 1 will be born with a fatal birth defect, and another 1 will die within 4 weeks of being born. For every 10 sets of twins that are born, 2 sets saw one of the babies die in the womb and be absorbed by the surviving twin, and another 1 set of twins will be born with one baby alive and the other stillborn. For every 1,000 babies born, 2 mothers died giving birth and another 5 suffered life-changing complications.

Not all babies develop properly. Each year, thousands of babies in America are born without faces, or without brains, or without the lower half of their bodies, or without lungs. Babies can cause blood clots, and can develop on the outside of the womb with no hope of surviving until term but with dangerous effects upon the mothers internal organs.

I am not saying that these are common occurrences, but I am saying that all pregnancies carry risk. Even with minor rates, with 365,000 births every day worldwide this puts thousands of mothers in difficult situations every year where they must decide between their own life, and that of an unborn child.

If the life of a mother is threatened by her baby - because the baby is growing outside the womb, or because she can't treat her cancer while pregnant - is the doctor not obligated by God's commandments to protect the mother as best he can? If the mother dies, then the babies dies too.

If a child appears on an ultrasound without a fully formed skull, or without a fully formed heart, or without a proper respiratory system, and that baby is guaranteed to die within weeks of being born, is ending the pregnancy not a mercy for the mother?

I am not saying that abortion is not murder, but I am saying that murder is not by itself a mark of evil. God Himself has designed the womb to kill fetuses, He has ordered nations to war, and has flooded the earth and Himself killed unborn children. Murder is defensible if it is in defense of others. God himself has commanded us to look out for the weak and needy, and when a hemophiliac mother faces death only to bring a half-finished shell of a human into the world what is she to do? What is a doctor to do? Just sit back and let the mother die?

I say that when abortion is performed as a mercy, or to save a life, it is in accordance with God's commands; and what can be more godly than that?

Most of my facts are repeated from my earlier debate posts.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by matt8800 2 years ago
Con claimed religions forbid abortion but Greek and Russian Orthodox churches, Hinduism and Orthodox Judaism all claim abortion to save the mother is acceptable.
Posted by will031 2 years ago
That is actually true depending on how you see it as the title was about the ungodly but the majority of the debate was focused on abortion as a whole and its moralities etc., but at the same time looking at the religious aspects as described in the title.

The title was honestly more of an attention seeker as I needed this debate for some personal reasons and I was not sure how long it would take for someone to respond, as this is my first debate here.
Posted by dsjpk5 2 years ago
By being Con, you are against the resolution, so you should be arguing that abortion is NOT ungodly. If I would have taken this debate, my first argument would have been "Con has conceded the debate by arguing the Pro position. I agree; vote Pro."
Posted by will031 2 years ago
Thank you @whooplah, and thank you for a great debate so far!
Posted by whooplaah 2 years ago
From round #5:
Saying natural abortion can in anyway justify medical abortion is almost to say natural deaths justify murder.

That is a point well said, sir, and I tip my hat to you.
Posted by will031 2 years ago
@whooplaah thanks!

@missmedic The difference between natural abortion and medical abortion is really just the fact that one we cannot do much about as it is a natural process where as medical abortion is a choice. Saying that natural abortion justifies medical abortion is almost like saying that natural death justifies murder.
I do not quite get your point about the removal of limbo as first of all it is a Catholic tradition and not specifically a christian, furthermore it was never catholic doctrine and I do not understand how you can say they have no place to go after death as with limbo being disregarded to ease salvation this means they go to heaven.
Posted by whooplaah 2 years ago
The link in my Round 1 post is a bit broken. Here is the webpage.

When you click the link, it adds a ">" at the end of the URL. I must have typed something wrong.
Posted by missmedic 2 years ago
What the pro-lifers ignore is the horrendous rate of natural, or spontaneous abortions that occur between conception and birth.
We know that miscarriages or natural abortions occur at a rate of about 30 percent, when an embryo is visible or detectable.
But what about losses before that, between fertilization of the egg and a detectable embryo, and how can we tell?
We know that when the cell cluster (or blastocyst) hits the surface of the uterus, a number of detectable hormonal changes occur within a woman's body.
By counting the number of actual pregnancies that follow implantations, we can get an idea of the actual loss of fertilized eggs and embryos.
Based on research done on thousands of women, the embryo loss is about 70 percent, and that does not count the loss between fertilization and implantation, which runs at least 50 percent according to in vitro studies on humans.
If we extrapolate the miscarriage results backward, we can estimate that 90 percent of all fertilized eggs never make it to term.
That is a profound number especially when you do the math.
In 2010, 131 million babies were born on earth. If the natural abortion rate is 90 percent, it means there were almost 250 million spontaneous abortions in 2010, or five times as many induced abortions.
In four years, that means 1 billion embryonic and fetal deaths.
Now, step back and look at the number, and understand what it means.
If Christians believe that a human life begins and a soul is infused at the "moment of conception," what a waste of souls.
And they have no place to go, now that the Church in 2007 decided limbo was a metaphysical fabrication.
The anti-abortion loonies who are targeting abortion clinics and Planned Parenthood offices should be turning their activities on churches, synagogues, and mosques.
One can only conclude, as did former Dominican priest and eminent geneticist Francisco Ayala, that God is the greatest abortionist of all.
Posted by minddrag 2 years ago
I would take this, but I am a bit busy with multiple debates at the moment...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by matt8800 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: This debate was a little hard to decipher since godly was never defined. Pro showed that the bible said God orchestrated the killing of conscious babies because he did not like the community they were born to. Pro also made the argument that anything god would do is godly, which Con did not refute. Pro pointed out that if it was godly for god to kill conscious infants because of who/where they were born, it could not possibly be considered ungodly to end the pregnancy of an undeveloped fetus for the life of the mother. Con argued that God can murder babies as he sees fit but humans cant make that decision. That argument was made more as a statement but the logic was not explained in a satisfactory way.