The Instigator
Mikal
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points
The Contender
2daniel
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Abortion should remain legal in the United States

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Mikal
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/12/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 585 times Debate No: 42201
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

Mikal

Pro

Resolution : Abortion should remain legal in the United States. There are some circumstances that justify abortion therefore it should be legal.

This is a shared BOP

Con is acknowledging and accepting that abortion should be illegal in all circumstance and that there is no circumstance that justifies an abortion.

Illegal in this debate shall be defined as - Banning the practice of abortion in all circumstances.



Rules

(1) Valid RFD for votes
(2) 48 hour argument time
(3) 10,000 character limit.
(4) In the last round con shall type "no round as agreed upon", failure to type this will result in a full 7 point concession from con because it awards him/her an extra round to argue
(5) A ff of a round will result in the loss of a conduct point
(6) 2 ffs will result in a full 7 point concession'


Structure

Me

R1 : Rules and outline
R2 : Opening Argument no rebuttals
R3 : Crystallizing final points, rebuttals, and closing statements.

Adversary

R1: Opening arguments
R2: Crystallizing final points, rebuttals, and closing statements.
R3 : Adversary shall type "no round as agreed upon"
2daniel

Con

Thank You for a great debate topic to debate on.

1st of all I would like for you to change some of the rule. Your resolution is not fair for the Con. Here is why, you said abortion should be illegal IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCE AND THAT THERE IS NO CIRCUMSTANCE THAT JUSTIFIES AN ABORTION, and there are always circumstances for something. There are things that are illegal but it is legal at some time, for example, it is the law that human should not kill another human, but during wars, people are allowed to kill other people. As you can see, I will argue that abortion should be allowed that some circumstances. Also, even though there are some circumstances that justify something, it does not make something legal. For example, like I said before, killing the enemy during a war is a circumstance that justifies killing another person, which is not legal in the U.S.A. Therefore I would argue that abortion should not be allowed except for certain circumstances.

So to go against your point, I would like to start off with why someone would have an abortion.
Here is the reason why:
" 21% Inadequate finances
" 21% Not ready for responsibility
" 16% Woman"s life would be changed too much
" 12% Problems with relationships, unmarried
" 11% Too young and/or immature
" 8% Children are grown; she has all she wants
" 3% Baby has possible health problems
" <1% Pregnancy caused by rape/incest
" 4% Other

As you can see, most of the reasons are because of their own mistakes or they just don't want to deal with it. The only ones that is actually not their fault are because of rape/incest(<1%) or Baby has possible health problems (3%). Which is only 4% out of 100%. So is it worth taking the life of a baby. And murder is illegal in the U.S right now and if baby is a living thing and we are killing it, then why isn't it illegal? Now you might be saying that a fetus is not alive, I am here to prove that a fetus is alive.
First I have the definition of Life according to dictionary.com:
The condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally.

When there is a fetus inside a mother's womb, their heart is thumping, the baby is being manifested by growth through metabolism. But it cannot reproduce, but as you can see, a 1 or 2 year girl would not be able to reproduce and they are clearly living which clearly means they are still at growth stage, same with fetus. A fetus is still at its growth stage which is really hard to adapt into a new environment just like how hard it is for a 1 or 2 year old child to adapt to an environment. So a fetus is a living thing. It matches the definition.

Finally, there is only 1 exception that I can think of and the only one is when the baby and his/her mother is in danger. This can happen when there is a problem with the baby and if the mother don't have an abortion, the baby's life AND the mother's life will die. So in this case, and only in this case, abortion should be allowed.

http://www.operationrescue.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Mikal

Pro

"1st of all I would like for you to change some of the rule. Your resolution is not fair for the Con. Here is why, you said abortion should be illegal IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCE AND THAT THERE IS NO CIRCUMSTANCE THAT JUSTIFIES AN ABORTION, and there are always circumstances for something"

Just for reference Con can not change the resolution. I clearly stated that Con "is accepting the fact that abortion should be illegal in every circumstance".

Con then states

" Therefore I would argue that abortion should not be allowed except for certain circumstances. "

At this point the debate is over

R1 Rules : "Con is acknowledging and accepting that abortion should be illegal in all circumstance and that there is no circumstance that justifies an abortion"

I am however going to abide my rules and if con fails to refute it under the guidelines that he has accepted there is no reason to continue this debate because of him changing the rules. This is not allowed


Abortion in cases where the mother can die

(1) Justifiable Homicide - When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger[1]

This is even operating under the assumption that a fetus is in fact a life, which can be contested by itself. The point to this contention is that we are afforded the right to defend ourselves from harm.

Right to self defense - [2]

This varies from state to state, but almost any state grants you the right to defend yourself lethally if your life is in danger. This in some state statues is also referred to as a Stand your ground law [3].

About 650 women die each year in the United States as a result of pregnancy complications [4]. In this circumstance abortion should be legal specifically. I am have shown one specific incident where abortion should be legal and have affirmed the resolution.

Ending Premises

[1] Women die from pregnancy complications (around 650 yearly in the USA)[4]
[2] The act of making abortion illegal entirely would deny these women the right to save their life
[3] We are afforded the right to defend ourselves from death or lethal force. [1][2][3]
[4] The fetus is inflicting deadly and lethal harm upon he mother in these 650 situations
[5] If abortion were entirely illegal we would be deny the mother the right to defend herself, therefore abortion should be legal in some situations which affirms the resolution that I presented.



Sources

[1] http://www.legis.state.la.us...
[2] http://www.princeton.edu...
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[4] http://www.cdc.gov...
2daniel

Con

2daniel forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Mikal

Pro

extend arguments
2daniel

Con

2daniel forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by OtakuJordan 2 years ago
OtakuJordan
Con just got destroyed, yes. But because he did not uphold his end of the resolution, not because he "opposed democracy."
Posted by NarcissisticOverthinker 2 years ago
NarcissisticOverthinker
As cute as your idea is, OtakuJordan, this debate went exactly how I thought it would. Mikal is just an abusive b*tch.
Posted by OtakuJordan 2 years ago
OtakuJordan
"After this, they must oppose democracy altogether and justify why, despite the majority of USA supporting the right to a woman's body (in the sense of abortion), the law should be altered form the status quo and forcefully make it illegal."

This is not true. It is perfectly legitimate to question a law put in place or supported by a majority. If it were not, democracy would fail.

All Con has to do is provide some strong ethics-based arguments for outlawing abortion.
Posted by NarcissisticOverthinker 2 years ago
NarcissisticOverthinker
too much BoP is on con.

Con must first prove that abortion should be illegal even under circumstances of rape and mother-killing births. After this, they must oppose democracy altogether and justify why, despite the majority of USA supporting the right to a woman's body (in the sense of abortion), the law should be altered form the status quo and forcefully make it illegal.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by TheHitchslap 2 years ago
TheHitchslap
Mikal2danielTied
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:50 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by TUF 2 years ago
TUF
Mikal2danielTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: This debate has concluded in a forfeit.