The Instigator
Soleydi23
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Balacafa
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

Abortion is wrong it 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 1 vote the winner is...
Balacafa
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/24/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 789 times Debate No: 80100
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

Soleydi23

Pro

Abortion is murder. it is committing murder inside of yourself. even if you were a rape victim or just don't want one everything happens for a reason and you duty is to have that child. a decision thats is acceptable i believe is that if you don't want to keep it you can give it away but killing it is not right. your as guilty as the men and women in jail for murdering people outside the womb !!
Balacafa

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
Soleydi23

Pro

Why do you believe it is okay to abort a child ?
Balacafa

Con

Argument

Women should have the right to make decisions about their own bodies. Women should be able to have an abortion if they are too young and unable to take care their babies. And the right to have an abortion if the pregnency negatively affects the women's or the babies's health.

It is women's right to make decisions about their own bodies. Having control over their own bodies is an important part of the equal rights that women have fount for. According to socialistworker, Women have the right to control their own body and reproductive lives. Therefore, no one has the right to tell a woman what she can or can not do with her body. This view is shared by the United States Supreme Court who ruled in the 1973 case "Roe Vs. Wade" that women have the right to control their own bodies. Since 1973 the Supreme Court has never over ruled this decision.

Another reason that women should be able to have abortions is in case the mothers are too young and unable to take care their babies. Unwanted pregnancies can be very stressful for women. Therefore, if they think they can not give their babies a good life then it is right for them to have abortions. For example, one of my friends was pregnant when she was 19. She and her baby's father were still in college by that time. Neither had a job, and they knew that they could not afford to buy food and provided medical care for their baby. My friend got an abortion, even though it was the hardest decision of her life. She knew that it would be better, however, for her own life and because she could not properly take care of the baby.

Critics of abortion say stopping a fetus's life is wrong. But if the babies health is at question during the pregnacy a woman should have the right to choose for herself. The reason is I believe that continuing a dangerous pregnacy will put a woman in a dangerous situation and will bring the baby into a life of sickness. In pre-pregnancy diabetes raises risk of birth defects, Donya (2008) report that " Women diagnosed with diabetes before they become pregnant are three times to four times more likely to give birth to a child with one or even multiple birth defects than a non diabetic mother, according to a study in the Aug. 1 American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology ". If a woman gets pregnant and she has a history of heart disease then continuing the pregnancy would put both her and her baby at risk. A woman with a history of heart disease should avoid pregnancy because of the the high risk of death or she will give birth to a baby with birth defects. Therefore, it is right if a woman chooses to get abortion in this case.

Advocates of abortion believe that death is harmful for the fetus and the fetus has the right to have a life just like ours. One advocate of abortion is Stone. For Stone, " death seriously harms the fetus and so the fetus has a right to life because death deprives the fetus of conscious goods which it is the foetus's biological natural to make itself have " . However when a woman's health is at risk or they will give birth to a child with defects then abortion would be better for the mother and for the baby. If we know the child will be born with defects then there is no point in having have the mother keep the baby if she chooses not to.

I'm not sure my opponent considered if the person wanting an abortion is a rape victim. If someone is raped (especially at a young age - younger than 18) do you think that they should have to go through the process of having a child. Not only will it be hard to look after at such a young age. It will also be hard to explain to the baby who the father is. Having a child who reminds you of such a horrible experience is not a nice thing. What if the child grows up to look like his father (the rapist). Then what?

In conclusion, I believe that women have the right to have abortions. First, women have the right to control their own bodies. Second, they have the right to have abortions if the pregnancies will affect their health and their babies health in a harmful way. Third, women have the right to have abortions if they have been raped. Also advocates of abortion believe that abortion is seriously wrong but women should do what is best for them and their babies.

Sources

Sharon Smith. " Abortion is every woman's right." Socialistworker 23 April 2004.

Stretton, Dean. "The Deprivation Argument Against Abortion." Bioethics 18.2 (Apr. 2004): 144-180. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. [Library name], [City], [State abbreviation].

Currie, Donya. "Pre-pregnancy diabetes raises risk of birth defects." Nation's Health 38.8 (Oct. 2008): 21-21. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. [Library name], [City], [State abbreviation].

J. Stone. Why Potentiality Matters. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 1987; 17:
815-830. More recently: J. Stone. Why Potentiality Still Matters.
Canadian Journal
of Philosophy 1994; 24: 281-294

https://www.google.co.uk...

https://www.google.co.uk...

I have been doing a few abortion debates recently so I hope that this will be a fun debate.
Debate Round No. 2
Soleydi23

Pro

You are right when you say it is a women's right to make a decision about her own body. But although the child is inside of you is it really your choice to kill it if it is its own person? By that i mean the baby is its own person he doesn't need your arm to scratch itself. of course you are the mother of that child but if you have a choice don't you think the baby does too? Satan laughs as mothers murder their own babies in the name of "freedom of choice". Therefore i feel you have no right.

I agree with you when you say unwanted pregnancies can be very stressful. Being pregnant is not easy it comes with side effects and 9 months is a very long time but i believe if you honestly don't want the baby or you know you cannot take care of it as you explained your friend couldn't i think you shouldn't have to take care of it if you can't or don't want too and thats where adoption comes in you shouldn't have to kill a baby when you can give it to someone who feels they need it. Just being able to conceive is a blessing that many don't have and wish they were you. Also giving it away rather than killing it is better for ones health because 50% of women reported to have had an abortion also reported having emotional problem lasting years and I'm talking about depression,grief,fear of disclosure,sexual dysfunction,increase alcohol or drug abuse,nightmares,suicide,anniversary syndrome, and the list goes on. Another health issue it can produce is infertility, abruptio placenta, breast cancer, pelvic inflammatory disease, and future ectopic pregnancy. so honestly would you rather risk hurting yourself than just giving it away ?

When the health of the baby and mother are at risk for any reason i believe instead of aborting it they should do an emergency c-section. why ? because I've met several people who doctor actually told them to have an abortion or they would die and they knew that abortion was not an option so they went along with there pregnancy and can you believe all of them today are healthy as ever and so are there kids that would've never existed today if they went by what the doctors told them. killing a baby is never really the answer there will always be complications but to those complications there are always solution and abortion not being one of them.

When you speak about abortion and rape i understand where you are coming from. Rape is horrible and to find out you pregnant from this tragedy is even worse but when you kill the baby your not making your nightmare disappear but killing a baby that really had nothing to do with it. do you think the baby knows that his biological father raped his mother. so should a child go to jail for what a parent did i don't think so. like i said adoption is always an option she doesn't have to keep it and have that reminder there she can give it away to someone who really wants it.

In conclusion, I believe abortion is wrong because not only does it affect the baby but it affect you as a person and potentially affect your body in a negative way. Inside the womb or outside murder is murder and its not your choice to take a life but gods choice.
Balacafa

Con

This debate has gone slightly off topic and onto the topic of God. I will just state this now for future reference. I am an atheist and I do not believe in God or Satan. God and Satan are not proven to be real so therefore it is not valid to include them into this debate. I really have a lot more I could say regarding those points although that would be an entirely separate debate and I'd end up wasting all of my characters on God's existence.

== REBUTTALS ==

(1) - Womens right to make a decision about her body: My opponent states that I am right when I say this however I am wrong. This doesn't really make sense but I will refute their argument anyway. My opponent states that the baby has a choice too however they do not state how the baby will be able to make that choice since it is still in the mother's womb, its mind is not developed depending on the stage in the pregnancy it may not even have any features that give it resembalence to a human being. Without a fully functioning brain it cannot think or feel pain. My opponnet then goes on to talk about satan laughing at mothers murdering their babies but as I have stated previously, Satan is not proven to be real and I accept that there is controversy in that statement and if we were both religious then that argument would be acceptable however we are not and if I go into it now we'd end up doing an entirly different debate. I request that my opponnet stays on topic and argues only with facts and information that is acceptable for anyone to believe.

(2) - Unwanted pregnancies can be stressful: My opponent states that they agree with me on this statment (again) and then goes on to try and refute it. My opponent gives a statistic with no source to back it up with and it does seem unreliable. A statistic is rarely exactly 50% because that means that it is theoretically just the toss of a coin. My opponnet also misinterpreted and failed to respond to another aspect of this argument. You may be stressed about having the pregnancy and going through with the 9 months as well as what will happen afterwards. What happens if you know that you have a smoking addiction and you will be constantly smoking throughout the pregnancy - is it then okay to continue with the procedure?

(3) - The mother / babies health may be at risk: My opponent is (finally) against a point that I have made and that is regarding the health of the mother and/or the baby. My opponent claims that they know people who have done an emergency c=section and survived and the doctors were wrong etc. However, personal experience is not enough to be strong enough as an argument on its own. You have provided no evidence that this has actually happened and even if it did you have provided no evidence to suggest that this was not an extremely rare case. If you provided a statistic (backed up with a source) to show that doctors are frequently wrong or that 80% (for example) of women survive eemergency c sections instead of following doctor's advice and having an abortion. This was not provided and therefore this claim is invalid.

(4) - The mother has been raped and is pregnant:

"Behavioral genetics' study of personality has made it clear that genes are important. In fact, a number of personality traits have been identified as having a genetic basis. For example, family studies have led to the discovery that generalized anti-social behavior is passed down through genetic inheritance."

This is reliable and a source will be provided at the end. If you read through this quote you will notice that it is clearly stated that personality has been identified as having a genetic basis - meaning that in this case the child may end up having similar desires and motives as the father. Do you really think that women who are rape victims should take the chance and give their child up for adoption and hope that their children don't become rapists? I certainly wouldn't take the risk of releasing a rapist into the world - especially if I had been raped myself!

Conclusion

To conclude this debate I reject the resolution that abortion is wrong and is murder. Before the debate enters the voting period I would like to point out some reasons as to why I have won this debate :

Spelling and grammar: My opponent has failed to capitalize I on many occasions here are some examples :

- did i don't think so

- like i said

- rape i understand

They also failed to capitalize words in general:

- so should a child go to jail for what a parent did i don't think so

- like i said adoption is always an option she doesn't have to keep it and have that reminder there she can give it away to someone who really wants it.

-
because I've met several people who doctor actually told them to have an abortion or they would die and they knew that abortion was not an option so they went along with there pregnancy and can you believe all of them today are healthy as ever and so are there kids that would've never existed today if they went by what the doctors told them. killing a baby is never really the answer there will always be complications but to those complications there are always solution and abortion not being one of them.

Argument: I was able to refute all of their arguments using statistics, logic and facts, my opponnet refuted some of my arguments poorly using statistics without sources and using God as an argument.

Sources: I have used sources in my arguments and used them to prove statistics, give examples and to refute my opponents arguments.

Conduct: Tied.

Therefore, for these reasons I believe that I have won this debate.

VOTE CON!

Sources

http://study.com...
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Blazzered 1 year ago
Blazzered
@canis When you eat the chicken its already dead and cooked, butchering the chicken is whats murder.
Going to war doesn't always result in murder, take the Cold War for example, so its the battles that result in murder, not the war itself.
Not giving your money to the poor is not murder since you are not personally taking any lives, and those who are poor most likely put themselves in their position, not always, but its what most likely happens.
Vegetarians still eat fish and such so what you mean is become a vegan.
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
Eating chicken is murder. Going to war is murder. Not giving al your Money to the poorest is murder. So become the poorest vegetarien pacifist there is.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Blazzered 1 year ago
Blazzered
Soleydi23BalacafaTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con gave logical arguments with sources to support his claims while Pro's arguments appeal to emotion and has no sources to support his claims. Con is the only one who used sources, which are cited and reliable by being health related, and scientific, while Pro had no sources.