The Instigator
xxxballisticxxx
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
justin.graves
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Abortion should be allowed under CERTAIN circumstances.

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 4 votes the winner is...
justin.graves
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/13/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,196 times Debate No: 34755
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (4)

 

xxxballisticxxx

Pro

Abortion is a highly talked about topic and of course, one that should be debated and discussed. I am only putting that I am PRO for abortion because I am, under CERTAIN circumstances, STRICTLY! I believe that if you have a victim of rape, incest, or some other pregnancy that was FORCED upon them, than yes.. They should be granted permission to receive an abortion. They did not do anything to get pregnant, other than be raped or victims of something vulgar, and I think that that is downright awful if you have to have a baby before you are ready or to someone that FORCED you to do that. Now the 16 year old girl having intercourse with every guy she dates and not using birth control or protection, if she gets pregnant, it's on her! She asked for it, in other words. I also think that if a family knows that the child will have down syndrome, have some form of serious mental retardation, or will not be able to walk, talk, or do anything without a person for the rest of their lives... I think abortion should be allowed to those families. I'm not saying abort every child with a problem, I'm saying that I know if I was pregnant and a doctor did tests on my child in my womb and told me they were going to have severe down syndrome, than of course, I wouldn't want my child to be 1.) bullied in school. 2.) Rely on someone else his/her whole life in order to eat, bath, and do the simplest of tasks. 3.) Be in a position where they cannot communicate. At this point, why would you force another human being to suffer through such a tragic, and repetitive life. A child that cannot walk/talk/or move, all at the same time, cannot do mostly anything that a normal healthy child may do. Why would you put someone through that?
justin.graves

Con

Thanks for this debate. The problem with my opponent's contention is his lack of foundation. Why is getting an abortion in the case of rape different than in cases of a one night stand? If the fetus is nothing but a blob of organic tissue, why on earth is it different to abort it in any situation than to remove the cancer? It would be nothing but tissue. However, if it is a human being, there is no reason. Zero. Zip. Nada. To kill this defenseless child. Now, that would make my opponent's argument illogical either way. Either my opponent is for the killing of children just because of something that wasn't there fault, or he thinks it is OK to force a woman to keep a blob of unwanted, organic matter inside of her. You can only have one or the other.

Now, my opponent's other contention just makes me sick: " I also think that if a family knows that the child will have down syndrome, have some form of serious mental retardation, or will not be able to walk, talk, or do anything without a person for the rest of their lives... I think abortion should be allowed to those families." What? So my opponent is saying it is OK to kill people with severe mental handicaps? Read this quote too:
" I wouldn't want my child to be 1.) bullied in school. 2.) Rely on someone else his/her whole life in order to eat, bath, and do the simplest of tasks. 3.) Be in a position where they cannot communicate. At this point, why would you force another human being to suffer through such a tragic, and repetitive life. A child that cannot walk/talk/or move, all at the same time, cannot do mostly anything that a normal healthy child may do. Why would you put someone through that?" First off, many of these things cannot be diagnosed before birth. Only Down Syndrome really can, since it has obvious signs and is because of an extra chromosome. So, forget the last two completely, they really cannot be diagnosed before birth except in extreme cases.

So, back to Down Syndrome, bullying, and so on. So let me get my opponent straight: He thinks we should kill babies with Down Syndrome, because they might suffer? What? So the good Germans in Nazi Germany should have just shot all the Jews they could because they didn't want them to suffer in concentration camps and on death marches? What? Also, who are we to decide for this child whether they will suffer or not? Most people with Down Syndrome can live happy, contented, fulfilled lives. Who are we to keep them from at least trying. Read the USA Today article in my sources. Very moving.

Finally, the base problem with the "disabled suffering" argument: Why don't we do it after they are born? I mean, if this is really about the person's suffering, why don't we just kill children with disabilities, even those that can be seen after birth. Why? Because they are children. They are people.

Notice that my opponent calls the baby in the womb a "child" and "baby" multiple times:
1. "awful if you have to have a baby before you are ready"
2. "child will have down syndrome"
3. "I'm not saying abort every child with a problem"
4. " child in my womb"
5. "I wouldn't want my child to be"

Obviously, my opponent believes that the baby is a child. So I ask my opponent a question:

"It is OK to kill children when _____"

Sources:
http://autismsd.com...
http://www.mayoclinic.com...
http://www.usatoday.com...
http://childrenrspecial.wordpress.com...
Debate Round No. 1
xxxballisticxxx

Pro

xxxballisticxxx forfeited this round.
justin.graves

Con

I extend my arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
xxxballisticxxx

Pro

xxxballisticxxx forfeited this round.
justin.graves

Con

justin.graves forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by gordonjames 4 years ago
gordonjames
@Justin -
I'm not sure you have stated your position.
I assume you are saying that there is NO reason for abortion ever.
If not, please make it more clear.

@PRO -
You said " if she gets pregnant, it's on her! She asked for it"
Are you suggesting that she deserved this terrible fate of motherhood because she like sex?
Are you forgetting that the child that gets brought into the world should not be considered?

Both of you missed a major question.
When does life begin? (legal, moral, and social concerns answer this question differently)

If life legally begins at birth - then we have laws that allow abortion up to the time of birth.
If life morally begins at conception we have people pressing for no abortion ever on moral grounds.
If we want to consider social factors like "Will this person be a drain on society?" we will have different answers and different questions.

Help me out.
What background are you coming from on this question?
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by jzonda415 4 years ago
jzonda415
xxxballisticxxxjustin.gravesTied
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: F.F.
Vote Placed by gordonjames 4 years ago
gordonjames
xxxballisticxxxjustin.gravesTied
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: FF and poor framing of the question
Vote Placed by TULIP 4 years ago
TULIP
xxxballisticxxxjustin.gravesTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con started off ok, but then started making it a little personal when should've just kept with the topic in a debatable manner. Pro points out a very great deal of questions and statements rebutting Pros position. Con gets points for convincing arguments and reliable resources.
Vote Placed by Magic8000 4 years ago
Magic8000
xxxballisticxxxjustin.gravesTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF