The Instigator
queencoop
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Mysery
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points

Abortion.

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...
Mysery
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/12/2016 Category: Health
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 371 times Debate No: 89536
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

queencoop

Con

I formally send this debate out to "Mysery". Thank you for this opportunity, I look forward to this debate!

The first round should be acceptance/position.
Second round is introduction on position.
Third round is rebuttals.
Fourth round is conclusion.

*Topic: I will be arguing against (Con) abortion as a whole.

**I will try to keep religious arguments/opinions out of my debate**

Once again Thank You so much!
Mysery

Pro

I accept. I will be arguing that abortion should be legal in the first trimester. I also want to state that although I am taking the pro side and this debate is called "Abortion," I am not "pro-abortion." I am pro-choice. Therefore, I am not going to argue about whether or not women should get abortions, but whether or not they should be allowed to get abortions.
Debate Round No. 1
queencoop

Con

Ghandi, MLK Jr., Albert Einstine, Rosa Parks, Leonardo De Vinci.

Why am I stating random names? Well let's look into what they have in common. All these people are brilliant human beings that shaped history, and the world, for the better. All those stated names were born in the world the same way we are, but they grew up to be amazingly influential figures. In their infancy you would never been able to guess what they were capable of. Same thing applies to these unborn children. They are alive, and they are human. They are a humans who also are capable of changing the world. If we kill these children before they have this chance, for all we know we could be killing the next Ghandi. By killing one child, we could end up killing the millions of people this child was destined to help. Do we really want to take that chance.

A majority of women seeking abortion have suffered horrible experiences, such as rape. The sick twisted individuals that caused this deserve to be punished. However the conceived child is not this sick individual, the child couldn't have helped the unfortunate event that created it. Why should the child be punished for someone else's actions? Ending its life won't make what happened go away. If the victim doesn't want to be reminded of the incident by seeing the child, then they can put it up for adoption. The child is alive, the child is human, and the child has not done anything wrong.

You, me, and everyone reading this has been given a chance at life. So why should those of us who have a chance of life, be allowed to decided if they can take someone else's chance of life away. What makes those of us who have a life, qualified to decide if someone should or should not receive a chance of life. No matter what this child is a someone. It is alive, and it deserves to keep its life.

Though it may sound cruel for me to say this, but abortion is an extremely selfish act.

Yes, even rape victims. Think about it. This victim suffered through a horrible injustice, and becomes pregnant. This victim doesn't want to conceive the child because it is "half of the rapist." The victim doesn't want to see the child and remember what happened. The victim wants to get an abortion to stop their own suffering from this incident. In order to stop their suffering the victim is willing to end the child's life. In a way the victim would rather kill and innocent human being, than have to face the event that keep haunting them. Yes it is horrible to have to go through something like that, but it happened. Nothing they do can change that. So why would anyone be willing to kill, to simply stop what pain has already been caused. Why continue this cycle of affecting other people's lives? Just think about it, and ask why? What good could this possibly do?

This system is often abused by others who are not victims of things such as rape. I have recently seen a picture that was meant to be funny, but I found it quite disgusting. The picture (can be viewed here: https://onsizzle.com...) states "When you give her abortion money, but she comes back with a stroller." This shows us how other people use abortions. People like this are more concerned in personal pleasure than they are in human lives. Instead of using protection, they will kill a living innocent child. The individuals that use abortion for this reason, are able to kill lives instead of being responsible.

Though abortion is often considered a choice, is it really our choice to make?

Who gives us this authority over other people's lives? The government? If so then why do they have the power to allow anyone to take the life of a living human?

The child is not responsible for the events that created it. The child may be a reminder of a bad event, but killing the child won't make you feel any better. There will always be pain.

We got the chance to live, so why don't we give them that same chance ?

My last wish is for you to ponder this question: Can we really afford to kill the next genius, political reformer, rights activist, war hero, etc.?

PLEASE NOTE: I think if the abortion is nessecary for the mothers survival, then it shout be carried out.

Thank you for this debate!

**i apologize for spelling and grammar I have been busy lately and have limited time**
Mysery

Pro

(I put rebuttals in this argument, so to be fair, you can put rebuttals in your conclusion.)

Sonia Gandhi, Nancy Brinker, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, JK Rowling, Mia Farrow.

Why am I stating random names? Well, let's look into what they have in common. All these women are brilliant humans beings that are shaping history, and the world, for the better. All these stated names were born in the world as women, and they grew up to be amazingly influential figures. In their earlier years, you would never have been able to guess what they were capable of. Same thing applies to those women who need abortions. They are alive, and they are human. They are humans who are also capable of changing the world. If we force these women to devote their lives to raising a child when they are not ready, for all we know, we could be destroying the next Gandhi, sentencing her to give up her education or career. By denying an abortion to one woman, we could end up killing millions of people this woman was destined to help. Do we really want to take that chance?

"A majority of women seeking abortion have suffered horrible experiences, such as rape." This isn't true. Less than one percent of abortions are sought due to rape (1,2) , so that kills your credibility a bit. Anyway, it breaks your crime and punishment analogy. Abortion is not punishing the fetus for crimes; most abortions do not involve rape at all. A more frequent punishment analogy is that forcing a woman to have a baby is punishing her for having sex.

I'm also not going to simply acknowledge the unsupported claim that "the child is human." How do you know? There is no commonly accepted answer to this question. Everyone has a different opinion.

No one who had a chance at life should be allowed to be pro-choice? If this is true, it seems fair that no one without a uterus should be allowed to be pro-life. What makes those of us who have the freedom to not have babies, qualified to decide if someone else should or should not receive that freedom? Or we can take it one step farther. No one who isn't in need of an abortion right at this moment should be allowed to be pro-life. What makes those of us who have been given the chance at life without having a baby, qualified to decide if someone should or should not receive a chance of that life. No matter what, this woman is a someone. She is alive, and she deserves to keep her quality of life.

The whole next argument centers around rape victims. Not only have we established that this is an uncommon reason for abortion, you are making a lot of assumptions about their reasoning. Sure, some women think that way. Others have other reasons.

Anyway, I'll accommodate the claim that "abortion is an extremely selfish act." You can view it that way, but we all have the right to bodily autonomy. That means that, under certain circumstances, "selfishness" is considered excusable. You are not required to damage your own body, even if doing it would save another person's life (3). You have a right to yourself. That is a very basic right, and getting rid of it would lead to disastrous consequences. Suddenly, there would be legally mandatory organ donation. Now, you can say that it's selfish to make use of this right. That's fine. As I said earlier, we're not discussing whether or not women should get abortions. We're discussing whether or not it should be legal, and the case I linked to (3) proves that it should.

I don't understand how that picture supports the reasoning that follows it. First of all, we have no information as to the background to that picture. Maybe they did use protection, and it just didn't work. Besides, the woman chose not to get the abortion. Anyway, it doesn't really matter if women are using abortion as birth control, because as gross as we both find that, no woman can be forced to carry a baby she doesn't want. Denying abortion because of this group would be totally unfair to the other group of women that needs an abortion for other reasons.

As I said with the bodily autonomy argument, it is indeed our choice to make, and yes, the government gives us that right.

My last wish is for you to ponder this question: Can we really afford to force the next genius, political reformer, rights activist, war hero, etc. to give up her education, time, and body to raise a child she does not want?

The note proves that you view fetuses as less than human. Why is it a full life that needs to be saved until the mother's life is at risk? If they're both human, why does the mother's life matter more? The fact that this is your instinct shows that the woman's rights must to be important than the fetus's.

(1) http://www.operationrescue.org...
(2) http://www.abort73.com...
(3) http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu...
Debate Round No. 2
queencoop

Con

Thank you for your time, my rebuttals are below:

You state: " All these stated names were born in the world as women, and they grew up to be amazingly influential figures. In their earlier years, you would never have been able to guess what they were capable of. "

-I would like to state: I couldn't have said it better myself! If these women were aborted early on, the world would have lost their amazing brilliance!!

You state: " They are humans who are also capable of changing the world. If we force these women to devote their lives to raising a child when they are not ready, for all we know, we could be destroying the next Gandhi, sentencing her to give up her education or career."

-I would like to state: No one is trying to force them to raise the child. If they are not ready to raise it, they can put it up for adoption. Plenty of people would love to raise that child. The woman would not have to do anything but deliver it, and give the child the same chance of life that she received.

You state: " By denying an abortion to one woman, we could end up killing millions of people this woman was destined to help."

-I would like to state: Please tell me how? How will having the child, that resulted from her actions, prevent this? How is giving the child to another family going to stop her ambition? Do you know how closed adoptions work?

You state: ""A majority of women seeking abortion have suffered horrible experiences, such as rape." This isn't true. Less than one percent of abortions are sought due to rape (1,2) , so that kills your credibility a bit."

-I would like to state: I was trying to address the issue of the rape victim argument, but if you want to pick straws I am fine with that. That then reinforces my other point that most women are being selfish. Instead of taking responsibility for not being prepared during sex, they kill the child because they 'are not ready.'

You state: "it breaks your crime and punishment analogy"

-I would like to state: Does it though? You obviously did not read my 'analogy' because I didn't imply what you are saying at all. Those women are indirectly punishing the child for a rape it couldn't prevent. See, that small percentage of people is guilty of doing so.

You state: "forcing a woman to have a baby is punishing her for having sex."

-I would like to state: No, it is stopping her from freely killing an innocent child, because she was to ill prepared to responsibly practice safe sex. It is stopping murder basically. Why do you think a man who kills a pregnant woman is charged with 2 sets of manslaughter?

You state: "I'm also not going to simply acknowledge the unsupported claim that "the child is human." How do you know? There is no commonly accepted answer to this question. Everyone has a different opinion."

-I would like to prove: "Here are just 12 scientific facts that happen to babies before they are born. These 12 facts demonstrate the uniqueness, value, and humanity of preborn children." To read more and prove my point please visit: http://liveactionnews.org...) Thank you.

You state: "No matter what, this woman is a someone. She is alive, and she deserves to keep her quality of life."

-I would like to state: So they should be allowed to kill in order to keep their life pristine and perfect?

You state: "What makes those of us who have the freedom to not have babies, qualified to decide if someone else should or should not receive that freedom? "

-I would like to state: NO ONE who has been given life, should be able to decide who shouldn't be given life.

You state: "Others have other reasons."

-I would like to state: Of course, there is no one reason. I was acknowledging the most common reasoning we have seen.

You state: "You are not required to damage your own body, even if doing it would save another person's life (3)."

-I would like to state: That would be in a matter to save someones life, as in saving someone who needs help. When the child is dependent on the mother, and the mother ends the child's life for selfish reason, that is more like murder.

You state: " Denying abortion because of this group would be totally unfair to the other group of women that needs an abortion for other reasons."

-I would like to state: I have excluded the ones who need abortion to preserve their health, and I have addressed those who are victims. What other group are you referring to?

You state: "My last wish is for you to ponder this question: Can we really afford to force the next genius, political reformer, rights activist, war hero, etc. to give up her education, time, and body to raise a child she does not want?"

-I would like to state: Is it necessary for you to copy every format I wrote my debate in, in order for you to object to a point that I never made in the first place? At what point in my debate did I say she had to keep the child?

You end my stating: "The note proves that you view fetuses as less than human. Why is it a full life that needs to be saved until the mother's life is at risk? If they're both human, why does the mother's life matter more? The fact that this is your instinct shows that the woman's rights must to be important than the fetus's."

-I would like to end by stating: No, I know enough to realize that the fetus depends on the mother so if the mother dies, then the child dies as well. That my friend, is counter productive. Why would I want to risk losing 2 great minds?

Thank you again, I have enjoyed this debate!!

*A MESSAGE FOR ANYONE CONTEMPLATING ABORTION WHILE READING THIS*

Whatever situation you are in, you can do this you are strong! My mother once went into an abortion clinic with intentions to aboard my little brother. She was divorced, alone, and shunned by family. While in the waiting room she talked to a young girl in college. The girl was going to aboard her baby so she could finish her education. My mother talked to her and told her the story about me. My mother had me in college, and no one thought she could do it. However she proved everyone wrong because she did it. She graduated with a bachelors degree, and a little baby girl. After my mom told the college girl her story, the girl was inspired by the fact that she too was strong enough to make it through college with a child. Telling that story also inspired my mom, and re kindled all the strength and motivation she once had. Both the college student and my mom walked out the clinic that day, with strength, a woman's pride, and both of their children still inside. My little brother is 8 today, and he is my everything. He is my world. I don't know what I would do without him. If I have reached any of you, just know you are beautiful and you are strong, and nothing (not even this child) can stop you from being successful.
Mysery

Pro

It isn't as easy as just giving your kid up for adoption and forgetting about him/her. Giving a child up for adoption will have a permanent impact on a woman, and studies show that she will actually go through the stages of grief afterward (4). Aborting a fetus which is not yet human is a lot different than giving up a baby. Once birth has occurred, some women are unable to go through with an adoption. It usually isn't because they suddenly realized how much they wanted a kid. No, once you hold your baby in your arms, a connection is formed. That same connection is not formed with a fetus in a womb (5). It is unethical to force a woman to make that connection before ripping the baby from her so that she can continue her life. Adoption isn't some magically perfect solution, either. Adopted people are 3.7-4.2 times more likely to attempt suicide. (6) Anyway, if the woman goes through with the adoption plan, she will always feel emotions ranging from emptiness to regret. Abortion? It's the complete opposite. 95% of women who have had abortions do not suffer from long-term guilt. In fact, the study reports "steady or improving levels of self-esteem, life satisfaction, stress, social support, stress, substance use, and symptoms of depression and anxiety over time post-abortion." (5) So yes, planning on adoption can still prevent a woman from reaching her full potential. If she goes through with it, she'll have emotional trauma. If she can't, she'll have to raise a child.

As I explained later in my prior argument, women (and all people) are allowed to look out for themselves and their bodies.

"Indirectly punishing the child for a rape it couldn't prevent"? I'm trying to say that that is so rarely the case that it isn't even worth discussing. You claim that abortion is "selfish." See? The woman is thinking about her own body and her own life. She thinks about what she can handle emotionally. For any given woman desiring an abortion, you can safely assume that she is not trying to make the fetus suffer because of the rape. Why are we focusing so much on rape? Neither of us have stances that change based on whether or not the pregnancy is from a rape.

Whether or not killing a pregnant woman should be a double homicide is still a heavily debated topic. Some states don't even have fetal homicide laws like you are claiming (7). To answer you question regardless, the keyword is "consent." When a pregnant woman is killed, the fetus is killed without her consent. When this happens, it takes away her right to choose. As a pro-choicer, killing a fetus without the woman's consent is just as bad as denying her an abortion. So you can't really compare that to abortion. Unless of course, you are just using this as another reason that the fetus is human- a point which is doesn't prove. Partially because it's still being debated, and partially because it is problematic to harm someone else's fetus because it takes their choice, not because the fetus deserves rights.

Your link is to a pro-life website, which is a very biased source. I have biased sources that are equally convinced fetuses are not human (8). I'm going to need straight scientific evidence before I just acknowledge that fetuses are human, but you're not going to find that. Most of the information on your link is just facts about random milestones in pregnancy. However, who's to say that any of that constitutes humanity? There is no scientific consensus on that.

You twist the words around. The woman is not "[killing] to keep [her] life pristine and perfect." She is utilizing her right to bodily autonomy. Please look over this violin-player analogy: (9).

Yes, I have been given life. But I have also been a fetus. As a pro-choicer, I am aware that I could have been aborted. And as happy and grateful as I am to be alive, my mother would not have been unjustified in making that choice. The other day, I was looking at pictures of my first-trimester ultrasound. I was not human. Being able to look at the fetus that grew up to be me, and still recognize the fact that my mother was under no obligation to give me life, gives me credibility. Plus, you didn't actually refute my analogy.

"That would be in a matter to save someones life..." See (9).

I am referring to the women who consented to sex but did not consent to pregnancy. They do not want to be pregnant, and it does not matter if their choices put them in that situation. They still have a right to bodily autonomy.

I copied your formats for rhetoric effect. Anyway, I already addressed why adoption is not always a feasible alternative.

Sometimes a mother is killed in childbirth and the baby still survives, which is what I was referring to. However, if you are talking about a threat during pregnancy, I'll acknowledge that. Thanks for clarifying.

*A MESSAGE FOR ANYONE CONTEMPLATING ABORTION WHO READ MY OPPONENT'S LAST MESSAGE*

Everything about strength is true. You can totally have this baby. Or you can have an abortion- there's no shame in that. It's your choice to make. Seriously, it's none of our business (or anyone else's).

(4) https://www.childwelfare.gov...
(5) http://time.com...
(6) http://pediatrics.aappublications.org...
(7) http://www.ncsl.org...
(8) [example of a biased source] https://rewire.news...
(9) http://spot.colorado.edu...
Debate Round No. 3
queencoop

Con

queencoop forfeited this round.
Mysery

Pro

We started this debate specifically because you were looking for someone who wouldn't forfeit, so that was hypocritical.

Abortion should be legal in the first trimester so as to protect the rights of the mother. She has the right to her own body. There is no scientific proof that fetuses are human, while there is proof that women are human, so their rights must be a top priority.

Anyway, I believe I have won this debate. I certainly deserve conduct points because of the forfeit. I also think that I was much more persuasive, because Con failed to address any of my last arguments. I believe my final rebuttal did a more than satisfactory job of refuting Con's final points.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Mysery 7 months ago
Mysery
Sorry about your family issues. I hope things look up for you soon. Don't worry about it.
Posted by queencoop 7 months ago
queencoop
Sorry for my forfeit I have been dealing with family issues, I will not be debating for a while until then. Once again my apologies.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by famousdebater 7 months ago
famousdebater
queencoopMyseryTied
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 
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 7 months ago
dsjpk5
queencoopMyseryTied
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:31