The Instigator
indianajones644
Con (against)
Losing
31 Points
The Contender
PoeJoe
Pro (for)
Winning
41 Points

Abortion is wrong.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/13/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,735 times Debate No: 4998
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (18)

 

indianajones644

Con

I believe every life is precious, and the unborn baby has no say in whether or not it gets to live. Keeping her baby or not should be the option a mother gets. More info after my challenge is accepted and good luck.
PoeJoe

Pro

----Clearing Things Up----

My opponent's opening argument is very ambiguous. However, in looking at my opponent's profile, we can easily see that she is pro-life.

Her burden shall be to prove that "Abortion is wrong", while my burden shall be to prove that "Abortion is not wrong." The labels of "PRO" and "CON" are wrong for this debate.

----Arguments and Counterarguments----

My opponent's whole entire argument relies solely on one single fallacious argument. She maintains that because killing is "wrong", therefore abortion is also "wrong". However, this assumption is wrong -- killing in it of itself is perfectly okay. From hunting, to fishing, to the zooplankton in our toothpastes, killing occurs all the time. What I believe my opponent was trying to say though, was that the forced termination of human life is "wrong".

That it true, and I will not attempt to argue that point. However, a fetus is NOT a human being. Wiktionary, for instance, defines a human being as, "A human being, whether man, woman, or child; Of or belonging to the species Homo sapiens or its closest relatives." There is no mention of fetuses anywhere in that definition. And in fact, if you can find a mainstream, unbiased source (from a dictionary, online dictionary, or otherwise) that defines humans to include fetuses, I will concede this debate.

Furthermore, your conception of the word "killing" is also flawed. If we can assume that preventing life to become life is in fact killing, then every moment you are not engaging in the act of reproduction, you are killing potential life. In other words, if at any time in your life you were not procreating, you just destroyed potential life. This notion, however, is quite ridiculous as to your idea of disallowing the abortion of a fetus. Therefore, the idea of "potential life" is neither equatable, nor comparable with actual life.

But even if a fetus were a human being, its "rights" still would not trump the rights of the mother. Who are we to expect pregnant women to voluntarily donate their body and life support systems to something else? Who are we to force a mother to devote eighteen years to taking care of a child? That is both unreasonable, and, arguably, sexist. Therefore, my opponent's argument that "unborn baby has no say in whether or not it gets to live" should be ignored.

Besides, even if abortions were made illegal, women would still seek them, and this would be extremely dangerous. According to Planned Parenthood, "In 1972 there were 1,000,000 illegal abortions and 5,000 to 10,000 women died from them." When Roe v. Wade passed in 1973 (a year after the above-mentioned statistic), deaths from abortion drastically dropped. This is supported by the National Center for Health Statistics' own statistics.

But above all this, the fundamental reason indianajones644 expresses her opinion this way in her post, is because she wants to inflict her morals upon the different people around her. As I've proven, potential life is NOT life. To her however, her own personal truth outweighs fact. This is okay. However, the government has no right to control the morals of its people. Above all, that is why you must allow abortions. And that is why you must vote for me for this debate. Abortion is not wrong.
Debate Round No. 1
indianajones644

Con

From answers.com:
Human:
noun

A member of the human race: being, body, creature, homo, human being, individual, life, man, mortal, party, person, personage, soul. See beings.

adj.

Having the form of a human, Of, relating to, or characteristic of humans: the course of human events; the human race.
-----
In my opinion, it is proposterous to suggest that every second we are not "creating" life, we are killing it. It does not exist, therfore you cannot kill it. This fetus, this miracle, is already here, living, breathing. More a human every day.

Soon after 11 weeks of age, (the fetal stage begins at week 11) the fetus can breathe. The heart, hands, feet, brain and other organs are present as well. How can one say any of these are not charecteristics of humans? Defining traits and body parts. Eyebrows, eyelashes, fingernails, and toenails appear. Mucles, a nervous system. All in the second trimester. Though it is in a womb, does it not think and feel pain? It has a small beating heart.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

As it says above, "having the form of a human" can anyone not deny this is a human, or something similar? All life has value, yes too those of fish and animals. Just because "killing happens every day" as my opponent suggests, does not make it justified.
PoeJoe

Pro

----Counterarguments----

My opponent has only provided one single argument this whole entire debate. That argument is that: "Fetuses are human, and killing humans is wrong. Therefore, abortion is wrong." However, this round she finally provides several examples to support her claim:

1) "Fetuses actually exist." I agree. However, again, fetuses are NOT human. In given a second chance to provide a definition that says so, my opponent has still yet to prove that fetuses are human. She has not met the burden of proof, and so this argument is void.

2) She correctly sates that fetuses may have "heart, hands, feet, brain and other organs" I agree. But they are NOT human. I mean, monkeys are more in common with humans than fetuses. Are monkeys human? No! You have still not met the burden of proof.

3) "As it says above, "having the form of a human" can anyone not deny this is a human, or something similar?" Okay, I agree that a fetus is similar to a human just as monkeys are similar to humans. As for your definition, the adjective form does not count. Obviously, "That human-like monkey" and "That monkey is human" are two totally different things.

----A Reminder----

I'd like to remind my opponent that by the rules of debate, she may not introduce anything new to her closing argument. If she does so however, the audience must ignore it. Thank you.

----Arguments----

1) My argument that if you are not reproducing every second of your life, then that you are killing potential life still stands because my argument was twisted by my opponent and not truly addressed. She moved my argument from killing potential life to killing actual life.

2) My argument that the rights of the mother are more important than "the rights of the fetus" still stands because it was never addressed.

3) My argument that disallowing abortions would lead to the death of many innocent women still stands because it was never addressed.

4) My argument of imposing values still stands because it was never addressed.

----Conclusion----

My opponent has made only one single fallacious argument. In contrast, I have provided MANY undisputed arguments as to why abortion is not wrong. The winner of this debate is clear. Vote for me!!!
Debate Round No. 2
indianajones644

Con

""From answers.com:
Human:
noun

A member of the human race: being, body, creature, homo, human being, individual, life, man, mortal, party, person, personage, soul. See beings.""

Note some of the words used above like life. It's a living thing, and my opponent fails to realize that it's alive. It feels pain, and if given the chance will grow into something beautiful. A new addition to our world. Children are the future, give them a chance to live.
PoeJoe

Pro

----She broke the rules of debate----

My opponent introduced a new argument in her closing argument despite my warning her that it was against the rules of debate. However, to be completely efficient, I will counter it.

My opponent's new argument is non sequiter. She asserts that because humans are alive, and that fetuses are supposedly alive as well, that a human is a fetus. That is preposterous! Using her logic, I (PoeJoe) could equal her (indianajones644) because we are both debaters. Her logic does not follow.

----Closing arguments----

This is how the debate went:

1) I successfully countered her one single fallacious argument.
2) I posed three arguments that were completely unchallenged in the whole debate, along with another argument that we unsuccessfully rebutted.

I believe the winner of this debate is fairly clear.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
Sorry, didn't notice that. I made the unfortunate assumption that Poejoe had thought things through :D.
Posted by CP 8 years ago
CP
Ragnar: I must disagree here. In round 1, PoeJoe specifically presented the definition of a "human" as "A human being, whether man, woman, or child; Of or belonging to the species Homo sapiens or its closest relatives." While I realize that your argument would rest on a philosophical definition of a "human"; that is not the manner in which PoeJoe defined it. Therefore, I believe the definitions I presented would be quite appropriate as a rebuttal (i.e. not fallacious).
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
Oh, and text, of course...
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
CP, that would just be a fallacy of equivocation. The dictionary clearly means "Human" as in "Homo sapien," which is not the same "Human" that Con (the real con, not the one who clicked Con by mistake) would agree on as sacrosanct.
Posted by PoeJoe 8 years ago
PoeJoe
Sssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

(okay here are more "grammatically correct" characters)
Posted by CP 8 years ago
CP
I voted PRO; however, CON could have easily had PoeJoe concede if she would have done even the slightest bit of research. For example:

- From the U.S. National Library of Medicine & National Institutes of Health -

Embryo:
-noun
2. the developing human individual from the time of implantation to the end of the eighth week after conception
(http://www2.merriam-webster.com...)

Fetus:
-noun
2. a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth
(http://www2.merriam-webster.com...)

Oh well...
Posted by PoeJoe 8 years ago
PoeJoe
By "electronic", do you mean video or text?
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
"Are you serious? "

Yes, I think it would be good to see.

"If so, want to debate that with me?"

If you're against it or care to argue against it, issue the challenge :d.
Posted by PoeJoe 8 years ago
PoeJoe
Meh, I don't really have a strong opinion.

However, "the presidential candidates debating electronically" is interesting. Are you serious? If so, want to debate that with me?
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
"PoeJoe
PoeJoe
It doesn't hurt to follow the basic standardized rules does it?"

It does when one has no STANDARD, and no rules are defined as basic rules. Also, many debates have new points in the second-to-last round, that inspire new points in the final round. The great thing about it is that it doesn't have to end there... the comments section exists to continue. Live debates implemented such rules due to time constraints, the internet has no such issues. Therefore, why not take advantage of the facts that make the internet the best format for debate?

(*wonders what a future in which presidential candidates carried out their debates electronically would look like. Probably eliminate a lot of stupid arguments :D).

"And furthermore, I countered her statement anyway."

I noticed as much.
18 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
indianajones644PoeJoeTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by EnLi 8 years ago
EnLi
indianajones644PoeJoeTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Vote Placed by PoeJoe 8 years ago
PoeJoe
indianajones644PoeJoeTied
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 
Vote Placed by Labrat228 8 years ago
Labrat228
indianajones644PoeJoeTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by s0m31john 8 years ago
s0m31john
indianajones644PoeJoeTied
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 
Vote Placed by Alessia_Riddle 8 years ago
Alessia_Riddle
indianajones644PoeJoeTied
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 
Vote Placed by Arnaud 8 years ago
Arnaud
indianajones644PoeJoeTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
indianajones644PoeJoeTied
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 
Vote Placed by Danielle 8 years ago
Danielle
indianajones644PoeJoeTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by grecherme 8 years ago
grecherme
indianajones644PoeJoeTied
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:30