The Instigator
deathklok
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
socialpinko
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Abortion is wrong

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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...
socialpinko
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/5/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,877 times Debate No: 16317
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (2)

 

deathklok

Pro

Abortion is akin to murder as it is the act of taking a human life( which in this case murder is against the law in most places) Therefore abortion is in direct defiance of the commonly accepted idea of the sanctity of human life.
For women who demand that they have complete control of their bodies, which should include preventing the risk of unwanted pregnancy through the responsible use of contraception, or if that is not possible, through abstinence.
In the problem of rape and or incest, proper medical care can ensure that a women can not get pregnant. Abortion again seems to punish the baby that has not fully developed who had committed no crimes, instead it is the perpetrator who should be punished. Therefore Abortion should be wrong.
socialpinko

Con

Definitions

Abortion: Also called voluntary abortion. the removal of an embryo or fetus from the uterus in order to end a pregnancy.[1]

Wrong: not in accordance with what is morally right or good[2]

Abortion is murder

My opponent claims that abortion is murder and thus wrong. But what exactly is murder? A legal dictionary defines it as:

"The unlawful killing of another human being without justification or excuse."[3]

I will be defending abortion within the first trimester of pregnancy which is currently legal in all 50 states. By my opponent's own argument then, abortion is moral as it is legal.

Abortion defies the sanctity of life

My opponent also argues that because abortion is technically the act of taking a human life, it is immoral. But I will ask my opponent why this specific act of killing is wrong when there are numerous other examples of killing which are commonly held to be right.

Examples:

Killing in war
Self-defense
The death penalty

I will ask my opponent what is different about abortion that makes it wrong simply on the basis that it takes a life when there are other instances where taking a life is seen as completely moral?

I will also ask my opponent why simply because the idea of the sanctity of life is "commonly accepted" that makes it immoral to take a life? This seems more like a subjective argument from popularity then a logical argument against abortion. Why does the fact that it is commonly accepted make it objectively correct?

Objective morality

In order to win this debate my opponent either must accept that abortion is objectively wrong in some sense, in which case he needs to bring an argument to prove that objective morality exists, or my opponent objects to the idea of objective morality and thus relies on only subjectivity for his argument, then my opponent needs to provide a reason why his personal feelings are more reliable than my own.

Vote Con

[1]http://dictionary.reference.com...
[2]http://dictionary.reference.com...
[3]http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...
Debate Round No. 1
deathklok

Pro

My opponent claims that muder is the unlawful killing of another human being without justification or excuse. When a baby is being developed as an embryo inside the fetus, it is technacly alive because it meets the four critera of life, Thus it is a human being. Then this is still a unjust killing because it is taking another human's life.[1]

The specific act of abortion is wrong as well as the other killings that go on everyday but is still the act of taking another life. Killing people in general is against the law and all other unjust killings should also be against the law.
Abortion is not only a crime against humanity, in that individual human beings are denied due process of law, but it is a crime against God![2]

Also for your agurment that the baby is a parasite in the messages you sent me. I will arugue that children are a blessing if you will take a look at this verse Psalm 127:3

[1] http://wiki.answers.com...
[2] http://webcache.googleusercontent.com...
socialpinko

Con

My opponent completely ignored my call for him to prove that anything is objectively wrong and so we may assume that everything that he wrote was from his own personal and subjective feelings. Even though everything my opponent wrote was subjective I will refute his 'arguments'.

Fetus' are "technacly" alive.

My opponent claims that abortion is wrong because fetus' are alive and taking a human life is wrong. However my opponent still has yet to bring any reason to his argument why taking a life is wrong other than that the idea is "commonly accepted". I will givemy opponent the last round to prove that taking a life is objectively wrong. Until he can do this he has no argument.

My opponent also completely ignored the part of my argument where I proved that abortion is in fact no murder seeing as murder is the unlawful taking of a human life and abortion is currently legal. Thus my opponent will need to not only prove that killing is wrong but that abortion is still murder.

//"Abortion is a crime against against god!"//

My opponent will need to first prove that his god exists before we can take a rule decreed by it seriously. After all, until my opponent proves that his god exists I can simply counter this argument by saying that not having an abortion is a crime against my god. I really do not expect my opponent to be able to prove the existence of his god in the next round however, that is what he must do before we can take his argument seriously.

My opponent also tried to bring an argument against something that I said in a PM with him. To my opponent, that is not at all in any way related to my argument in this debate and even if it was your verse means nothing seeing as you have brought no reason for me to believe in your god.

My opponent has brought no reason for voters to think that abortion is wrong.
Vote Con
Debate Round No. 2
deathklok

Pro

deathklok forfeited this round.
socialpinko

Con

Unfortunately my opponent either closed his account or had it shut down. Anyway I responded to and refuted his arguments and he did not respond to these. My opponent did not show why either anything was objectively moral or why his subjective opinion was more right then my own. He also did not back up his claims of abortion being a crime against god with any evidence of god existing.

This honestly seems like a waste of a debate, however I clearly refuted each and every one of my opponent's arguments. As instigator and Pro of this debate he has not upheld his BOP and so I urge a Con vote.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by socialpinko 5 years ago
socialpinko
Hey colorguard, I hope you're going to vote according to who argued better and not according to your own personal opinion.
Posted by Colorguard101 5 years ago
Colorguard101
ABORTION IS WRONG,first if you didnt want to get pregnant then use protection. And it is your fault you didnt use protection not the babys so there for the poor baby should not have to die just because you don't want to step up and be a mother. maybe next time you will use protection and you wont have to worry about no abortion.
Posted by CrazyRepublican 5 years ago
CrazyRepublican
haha yep i told him not to, but he did it anyway
Posted by socialpinko 5 years ago
socialpinko
Possibly. The moment he mentioned god though I figured I had it in the bag.
Posted by socialpinko 5 years ago
socialpinko
Possibly. The moment he mentioned god though I figured I had it in the bag.
Posted by CrazyRepublican 5 years ago
CrazyRepublican
hah socialpino think you have already won this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by BennyW 5 years ago
BennyW
deathkloksocialpinkoTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Agree with the premise, but not the best arguments and the forfeit really hurt.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
deathkloksocialpinkoTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Strong refutation by Con, goalpost shifted by Pro in response and several arguments conceded/dropped. Dominating performance, all 3 pt on argument clearly to Con.