Debate Rounds (5)
Accept this debate by typing "I accept".
The rounds will be divided as follows:
Saying why you are pro/con to the subject.
This by defending your statement through argumentation and facts/numbers.
Counter of the opponents arguments.
Do not be subjective, be objective.
A defense from both parties, countering the counter arguments.
The influence of this debate on you opinion before the debate.
Has this debate in any way changed/modified your opinion on the subject?
For this particular subject I would like to ask the contender to NOT use god as a source, neither should he use the bible.
Religion is not a valid argument.
Good luck, I hope this will be productive
To start with I would like to repeat the condition on which you have agreed by typing "I accept": No religion shall be used in this debate, not any links to the bible, Koran or even Thora.
As of my debate, here I go:
In my opinion the decision is entirely dependant on the woman, no matter what the situation is, the woman should decide if she wants or does not want to abandon her child or keep it. This decision should of course be discussed with specialized staff.
Abortion should be allowed (By that I mean generally accepted) because some people, in some situations, need abortion because they are/will be unable to provide a stable living for their child. A stable living does not necessarily mean an economically safe situation, the morals of the mother to the child are also very important. If the child is the result of a rape, misbehaviour or abuse, the mother will most likely choose for abortion, which is a choice I would allow and could not possibly counter.
I personally am from Belgium, in my country abortion has been legalized since 1990.
I will take the numbers from my country as an example since I think my country (being a pioneer in terms of human freedom) can be used as an example.
So far, 13% of the pregnant population decides that abortion is a better solution. The reasons for this are quite normal and very acceptable, about 35% of them decides to abort for financial, material or relational problems. Only 10% of the woman do it because they feel like they have a complete family.
The cost of the operation averages 3 euros depending on the situation. This is a very fair price, this also means the operation is accessible to anyone.
Another important thing to note is that 60% of the people that abort did use means of anti conception to avoid having a child, yet, they got one.
My conclusion to this set of arguments is that there or plenty of reasons why abortion should be legal, and plenty of reasons it has to be accepted in society.
I look forward to an answer.
Send request if translation needed.
Sswdwm forfeited this round.
As no arguments were given I can not provide a rebuttal.
No problem at all.
Wish to continue or to stop the debate here?
I am happy to take the debate loss.
I thought I could support some aspects of an anti-abortion position and I did write several arguments but I felt very dishonest disingenuous and thereby unmotivated in doing so.
I'll briefly summarize the points I do feel somewhat strongly about (and I would like you to address them, you can do so here or in private as I have already conceeded the debate loss)
My main argument was this:
Pro needs to discuss why the rights of a newborn or infant should be given over that of a foetus since
1. Both have been demonstrated to excercise a level of suffering
2. Both suffer from childhood amnesia, so it's dabatable if an infant has any intrinsic life-value over a foetus
3. Only difference between a newborn and foetus are varying stages of physical development and it's exit through the birth canal, is that really satisfactory reason to give an infant the same rights to life over a foetus
As for women's right to her body
1. Both infant and foetus depend on their mother/host family for it's survival anyway. Thereby we already have some agreement that a mother sacrifices a degree of right to her life/body in bringing up a child anyway. Why shall we expect differently just because it's carried within?
1. Adoption remains a strong option for mothers unwilling/unwanting to raise a child, and suffers much less of the morality complications
1. The issue of abortion becoming another means for contraception, whcih would erode into the progress we have made with contraceptives, especially regarding serioud STD's such as HIV
2. Women generally experience regret after abortions*
* I corrected myself on this when looking for the statistics, indeed I was wrong
As for positions on the points you already made
1. I agree, very strongly, that medical or traumatic (rape, etc) cases should allow for abortion
2. Also very early stage terminations should be acceptible
3. The morality, or rightness or wrongness of an action should depend on the affect is has on the consious beings
That's about it. I didn't elaborate, just asserted, so I don't expect any elaborative answer. I will the rest it up to you.
Thank you, con, for your arguments.
The rights of the newborn should be given over that of a foetus since the newborn infant has caused more suffering than a foetus. The newborn is also physically visible and unique, whereas the foetus look like any other foetus on a first glance.
The newborn has to be taken care of on another level than the actual foetus. This is mainly why woman have, according to me, the right to stop their pregnancy and abort a foetus.
The bond between mother and child is unique and only gets there when the child is born, at this very moment the bond between mother and child are physically made, the woman will recognise this as her real child.
As to answer your second question, the right to abort is the woman's, no other person and/or instance can take this right away from her, abortion has always been practiced (not officially that is) and has never been a problem for the mother or doctor (if followed correctly).
Abortion will never be seen as a mean of contraception since it is in fact much harder to do and to withstand, an abortion has physical consequences too that have to be considered. Whereas an official mean of contraception has no physical consequences whatsoever. (yet again, if used correctly, don't swallow a condom kids!).
Great debate anyhow and I truthfully learned from it, quite interesting to hear ones opinion.
I do admit that my point of view is more ethical and easier to defend.
Thank you for your points,
I hereby forfeit.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Buckethead31594 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: I would have given Pro the conduct point because of Con's forfeit. Nonetheless, Con's honorable follow-up concession and apology negate that's conduct point. Arguments to Pro.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.