The Instigator
MTGandP
Pro (for)
Winning
72 Points
The Contender
wordsmith
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Abortion within the first 20 weeks of pregnancy is morally acceptable.

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
Pro Tied Con
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: 7/11/2009 Category: Science
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,742 times Debate No: 8943
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (8)
Votes (11)

 

MTGandP

Pro

Definitions

Abortion: The termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus. (Merriam-Webster)
Morality: A code of conduct put forward by a society. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Used to determine right and wrong.
Morally acceptable: Permitted by morality.
Fetus: A human child at or before week 20 after conception, assuming a normal growth rate. (my own definition)

==========================================
Contention 1: Fetuses are not conscious, nor do they have emotions.

A child does not become conscious until around week 26 [1] and does not become able to feel pain until week 30 [2]; emotions come even later. No being without consciousness deserves the right to life: unconscious beings have no desires or emotions. Beings capable of suffering are more questionable, but fetuses still are incapable of suffering. This contention can be empirically supported by looking at what beings are socially acceptable to kill:

-Plants, which possess no consciousness and yet are more complex than many animals, are never considered to have the right to life. We act as though we own them and have complete domain over them. We even genetically modify [3] and mass produce them, and no one cares about their rights. So according to society, plants have no rights.

-Bugs have limited consciousness, and we do not consider their individual rights any more than plants. We kill them all the time [4].

-Birds and mammals have more consciousness, and their rights are questionable. Some believe that birds and mammals deserve more rights [5], while others do not. These animals are capable of emotions and can feel pain; but still, some do not believe that they deserve fundamental rights, such as those that test potentially harmful drugs on rats and guinea pigs.

===========================
Contention 2: Fetuses rely on their mother.

Fetuses are completely dependent on their mothers for survival until about 5 months after conception [6]. Their mothers provide them with nutrients and even oxygen. They could not survive on their own; in essence, the fetus is part of the mother's body. Body parts have no rights, and a being is domain over its own body. Mothers can do as they choose with non-viable fetuses.

========================
Contention 3: Fetuses are not rational.

True human rights are bestowed upon rational and self-aware beings such as humans. Rational beings can logically deduce that they wish to continue living. Rationality allows them to reach beyond previous mental boundaries and consider abstract concepts such as pain and death. But fetuses are incapable of rationality. They cannot contemplate their own mortality. They do not have a rational desire to continue living. They do not deserve the right to life.

Sources
[1] http://www.religioustolerance.org...
[2] http://www.religioustolerance.org...
[3] http://bioenergy.asu.edu...
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[5] http://www.peta.org...
[6] http://www.ppacca.org...
wordsmith

Con

I would like to thank pro for posting this debate, but i wont, or atleast wont admit that i allready have.
Regardless on with the debate :D -->:

My opponent defines morality "Morality: A code of conduct put forward by a society. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Used to determine right and wrong.
Morally acceptable: Permitted by morality.".
But unfortuantely my opponent does no make clear which societies this debate will consern it self with.
I am a member of a society, one which consists of me and some close friends (hypethetical or not lets consider I have friends), me and my friends beleive in one golden idea: We have unlimited freedome. To us it is morally permissable that one amongst us murders another. Insidentally it is also permissable to any individual to abort a child so long as the child concieved will not be of a certain race (human).In the case that the child to be concieved is human the individual willing to have an abortion must not brush thier theeth after 2 am on thursdays for twenty two days . To us it is morrally unacceptable to persue an abortion of a human child, if the child to be concieved, however is not human it is morraly permisable to abort whenever one pleases. (after 20 weeks for instance).
Debate Round No. 1
MTGandP

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate, which is an unusual way to say that I am thanking my opponent for accepting this debate.

My opponent is attempting to make his case based on a semantical argument. He is using an unconventional definition of "society", and I recommend that his definition not be accepted. However, even if we did assume that society refers to my opponent's personal society, I can still make a very strong case with a single point: every person in 'society' has "unlimited freedome [sic]"; therefore, abortion is morally acceptable. Resolution affirmed.

However, I will now argue that my opponent's definition of "society" is inadequate. It is highly unconventional; society typically refers to what is sometimes called 'Western society'; that is, the collection of people and ideals throughout most of the western world.

Merriam-Webster defines society as "a: an enduring and cooperating social group whose members have developed organized patterns of relationships through interaction with one another b: a community, nation, or broad grouping of people having common traditions, institutions, and collective activities and interests." This is a more adequate definition by a widely known dictionary.

Thefreedictionary.com, run by the American Heritage Dictionary, defines society as "a. The totality of social relationships among humans." This definition, while different, is also a good one.

Either of these definitions -- by respectable organizations, may I add -- provides a more than adequate basis for my round one contentions.
wordsmith

Con

wordsmith forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
MTGandP

Pro

My opponent has forfeited. Please extend all arguments.
wordsmith

Con

wordsmith forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
MTGandP

Pro

Vote Pro!
wordsmith

Con

wordsmith forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
Defaulted PRO due to multiple forfeits.
Posted by MTGandP 7 years ago
MTGandP
What? 26 to 28? I guess I have enough debates to get vote bombed. :(
Posted by MTGandP 7 years ago
MTGandP
Oh, I linked a flyswatter. XP Forgot about that one. I mostly did it to drive the point home, though, as if to say, "there's even a device specially designed to kill flies!"
Posted by Lifeisgood 7 years ago
Lifeisgood
This is what I was talking about:

"-Bugs have limited consciousness, and we do not consider their individual rights any more than plants. We kill them all the time [4].

-Birds and mammals have more consciousness, and their rights are questionable. Some believe that birds and mammals deserve more rights [5], while others do not."

C'mon. Did you really need sources to support that?
Posted by MTGandP 7 years ago
MTGandP
Though I did not cite them all directly, I used every source that I included.
Posted by Lifeisgood 7 years ago
Lifeisgood
B/A: Con.
Conduct: Pro. Con forfeited.
S/G: Pro. Duh.
Arguments: Pro. Duh.
Sources: Pro. Honestly speaking, Pro didn't really need all those sources; I think he just included them to get this vote. Oh well. He deserves it anyway.

I want a chance to debate you on abortion, MTGandP. You had some good arguments.
Posted by MTGandP 7 years ago
MTGandP
Conduct: PRO. Con forfeited.
S&G: Con had numerous errors. PRO.
Arguments: PRO. Con's case was very weak.
Sources: PRO had way more than Con.
Posted by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
Fail.
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by atheistman 7 years ago
atheistman
MTGandPwordsmithTied
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 Volkov 7 years ago
Volkov
MTGandPwordsmithTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
MTGandPwordsmithTied
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 wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
MTGandPwordsmithTied
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 Rezzealaux 7 years ago
Rezzealaux
MTGandPwordsmithTied
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 studentathletechristian8 7 years ago
studentathletechristian8
MTGandPwordsmithTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by Cody_Franklin 7 years ago
Cody_Franklin
MTGandPwordsmithTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
MTGandPwordsmithTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by Lifeisgood 7 years ago
Lifeisgood
MTGandPwordsmithTied
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 MTGandP 7 years ago
MTGandP
MTGandPwordsmithTied
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:70