The Instigator
Ron-Paul
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
lannan13
Con (against)
Losing
0 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...
Ron-Paul
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/9/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 684 times Debate No: 20310
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

Ron-Paul

Pro

Point 1: The prohibition of abortion will just make more deaths due to abortion. It will be in the same fashion as the prohibition on alcohol in the 1920s. The prohibition of abortion will lead some women to seek "underground" doctors, who will abort illegally. These doctors are usually dangerous for mother and baby. So instead in the style of a regular abortion where only the baby dies, under these circumstances, the chances of the woman dying skyrocket.

Point 2: Prohibiting abortion will just increase crime and poverty. The kind of people that abort are either young or poor. The young will not take care of the baby for society has already cast her out. She will get rid of the baby. The poor will not take care of the baby either. Because poor tends to breed poor. Crime tends to breed crime. If the woman does not abort, the baby could grow up into a criminal, or live an under-privaliged childhood. The baby would be better off not being born. Plus, chances are high that he or she will be murdered when they are older if they are poor and live in a bad part of town.

Point 3: Every woman has rights. Being able to abort is one of them.

Rebuttal?
lannan13

Con

1. then people shouldn't do it... or at least were a condom
2. In the depression people made home made abortions. I don't know how to get videos on here so just put this url link up. (no pun intended)
3. What about the basic human rights. The right to live. It is inbeded in the Constitution so abortion would all-in-all be against the law.
4. post-abortion stress. my source for this is, http://postabortionsyndrome.org...,
5. now here's the pun, LordKnuckle said, "I see everyone for abortion has already been born."
6. How would you feel if you'd been aborted. Nothing cause you wouldn't of existed.
7. The baby is alive when the heart first beats.
8. What would happen if some of the greatest people in history were aborted.
overval sources:

http://postabortionsyndrome.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Ron-Paul

Pro

Response Point 1: Correct. People should not have pregnancies that they do not plan to have or keep (intended or uninteded pregnancy). But this unfortunate fact will never be suppressed (meaning that millions of people per year will continue to have sex that may result in an unintended pregnancy). Thus, abortion is still necessary.

Response Point 2: Exactly. Thank you for proving my point that if abortion was made illegal, than women are going to get abortions anyhow, and a lot of women have them homemade (to use your term), and most of those are unsafe.

Response Point 3: There is no right to live. Being able to live is a privilege provided by God. But to not go off on a tangent, I would like for you to state me the passage that either says those words verbatim (preferably), or something of the same effect.

Response Point 4: I will cover post-abortion stress in one of my attack points.

Response Point 5: Do you really believe Lordknukle? He has some extremely weird beliefs.

Response Point 6: Most women who abort are poor. If the baby was born into this surrounding, the baby would be most likely poor his or her whole childhood, and most likely, the rest of his or her life, and these surroundings greatly increase the chance that he or she commits one murder or is murdered. The child would be better off not being born. I would not want to live in or experience those types of surroundings. Would you?

Response Point 7: The matter of when a fetus is of one's own opinion. Some say when the fetus's heart first beats, or when the fetus can start breathing, or at conception, or when a fetus can feel pain, or when a fetus can survive on it's own, or at birth. There is no strong, solid evidence of when a baby is born, and most of the accepted alive dates (like when a fetus can survive on it's own, or when the fetus can feel pain) have no set date, but are still a matter of scientific study not proven yet. You cannot prove that a fetus is alive when it's heart first beats.

Response Point 8: Most of these famous people did not live in poor surroundings, or where abortion was a major opinion for the child's mother (I am not saying that all famous people do not fit this category because some do).

Attack Point 1: "In 1964, 28-year-old Geraldine Santoro bled to death on the floor of a Connecticut hotel room after she and her former lover, Clyde Dixon, attempted an abortion on their own. Dixon, who had no medical experience of any kind, used a textbook and some borrowed tools. When things went terribly wrong, he fled the scene, and Santoro died alone": http://socialistworker.org.... This quote alone sums up what it was like for the thousands of women who died at the hands of untrained specialists.

Attack Point 2: Six months after abortion was legalized in Guyana in 1995, admissions for septic and incomplete abortion dropped by 41%. Previously, septic abortion had been the third largest, and incomplete abortion the eighth largest, cause of admissions to the country's public hospitals. One year after Romania legalized abortion in 1990, its abortion-related mortality rate fell from 142 to 47 deaths per 100,000 live births. These are examples of the positive impact legalizing abortion has on women's health.": http://www.ourbodiesourselves.org....

Attack Point 3: "Forty-two percent of women obtaining abortions have incomes below 100% of the federal poverty level ($10,830 for a single woman with no children)"
"Twenty-seven percent of women obtaining abortions have incomes between 100–199% of the federal poverty level": http://www.guttmacher.org.... Do you think the babies that were aborted by these 69% of women who are single, and make a yearly income of less then $21,660 would have had a very good life? Do you think they would ever have a chance? Say those 69% of women were not able to abort. Those children grew up in terrible surroundings surrounded by violence, murder, want, and laziness. I am sure a lot of those children would grow up to become theives and even murderers. And I am sure a lot of those would end up in jail. These children would be better off not being born.

Attack Point 4: "The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that in 1972 alone, 130,000 women obtained illegal or self-induced procedures, 39 of whom died.":http://www.guttmacher.org.... This means that at least 260,000 people broke the law by having an illegal abortion. That number only takes into account the woman and the doctor. There could be more the 2 involced in one abortion. The prohibition of abortion will again cause 130,000+ crimes. And they need solving. Police are already having a hard time controlling crime. Adding 130,000+ crimes with at least 260,000 people involved will make the police department a mess.

Attack Point 5: "In 1967, England liberalized its abortion law to permit any woman to have an abortion with the written consent of two physicians. More than 600 American women made the trip to the United Kingdom during the last three months of 1969 alone" "The year before the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade, just over 100,000 women left their own state to obtain a legal abortion in New York City": http://www.guttmacher.org.... This means that is abortion is made illegal, then thousands of women will travel to a foreign country that legalizes abortion. In other words, they will bypass the law.

Attack Point 6: This is the connection between abortion and mental illness I promised.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com......
http://www.guardian.co.uk....... This source claims that the unwanted pregnancy is the cause of mental illness, not the abortion itself.
http://feministing.com....... This source cites at least three studies denying the claim.

I know you stated the connection of post abortion stress. Here is a quote that I think may sum this part of the argument up in my favor: "This review identified several factors that are predictive of more negative psychological responses following first-trimester abortion among women in the United States. Those factors included:Perceptions of stigma, need for secrecy, and low or anticipated social support for the abortion decision; A prior history of mental health problems; Personality factors such as low self-esteem and use of avoidance and denial coping strategies; and Characteristics of the particular pregnancy, including the extent to which the woman wanted and felt committed to it.":http://www.apa.org......

So the abortion did not cause the mental illness, rather, it was the unwanted pregnancy. If the woman was made to stay with the pregnancy, then there would be even worse post-pregnancy stress. Get the connection?

Attack Point 7: In February 2003, the US National Cancer Institute (NCI) held a workshop of more than 100 of the world's leading experts who study pregnancy and breast cancer risk. The experts reviewed human and animal studies that looked at the link between pregnancy and breast cancer risk, including studies of induced and spontaneous abortions. Some of their findings were:
• Breast cancer risk is increased for a short time after a full-term pregnancy (that is, a pregnancy that results in the birth of a living child).
• Induced abortion is not linked to an increase in breast cancer risk.
• Spontaneous abortion is not linked to an increase in breast cancer risk.

The level of scientific evidence for these findings was considered to be "well established" (the highest level): http://www.cancer.org.......

This conclusion again states that if the woman was made to stay with the pregnancy (or not allow her to abort), than the women is at an increased chance for breast cancer. Another point is the if you prohibit abortion, you would have to prohibit pregnancy before that because the pregnancy itself causes mental illness and breast cancer.

==OFR==

I have essentially crushed the pro-Life argument.
lannan13

Con

1. if there is a pregnacy than God intended it to happen. Nothing in the world can happen without God's approval.
2. Yes some are home made just look at the depression when families couldn't afford children so they drink, do like in the video in the 1st round, or some other satanitc way.
3. The natural rights are life, liberty, and property and all of these things are in the U.S. Constitution. So therefore an abortion is actualy illegal by law.
4. Okay then
5. I was just quoting him
6. adoption is always a choice no one said you've had to raise the kid. You know give it a beter future then no future at all. eh?
7. The fetus has several struggles to even become life. like to avoid WBC's or even Viruses.
8. adoption, sorry writting paper read this for more details, http://www.americanadoptions.com...
9. Wade V. Boggs upheld and prooved abortion should be illegal
1a. that my friend is why abortion is bad so that techinally prooved why abortion is wrong.
2a. that just says that deaths per birth have fell... with age comes expirance.
3a. adoption my friend adopition
4a. wow is all I have to say there is a reason it is illegal. people don't know how to do it right.
6a. what about the guilt that fallows the abortion you can't stop that.
7a. what do you say to the Catholic Families that have 5 kids and DON"T HAVE BREAST CANCER. I know, because I'm invovled in a large family
Debate Round No. 2
Ron-Paul

Pro

Response Point 1: I don't think that the voters are going to find this a very reliable refutation. If nothing in the world can happen without God's approval, than I guess God changed is mind in 1973 for Roe vs. Wade, and is beginning to question that. Abortions happen everyday. Your statement is completely illogical.

Response Point 2: What is your point with this point? Is there any argument here?

Response Point 3: First of all, abortion is NOT illegal by law. Let's clear that up. And secondly, the "rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" were not aimed at babies, and the "right of life" was not aimed at babies either. This was talking about the individual person to make his own decision however he saw fit. So if she wants to have an abortion, that is here choice.

Response Point 4: Sorry to break it do you, but quoting another debater who dosen't even have prove should not be a proof to your argument. That is not a proof at all.

Response Point 5: I was going to use this in one of my next attack points, but oh well. ""A number of studies have looked at cases of women living in jurisdictions in which governmental approval to have an abortion was required, who sought to have an abortion, but were denied the ability to do so (Dagg, 1991; David, Dytrych, Matejcek and Schuller, 1988). For example, Dagg (1991) reports that these women overwhelmingly kept their babies, rather than giving them up for adoption, but that they often resented the unwanted children. These children who were born because their mothers were denied an abortion were substantially more likely to be involved in crime, even when controlling for the income, age, education and health of the mother.": http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu....... What I am trying to say is that after the women have the baby, the hormones racing in her do not allow her to give the baby up. She does not want to do it.

Response Point 6: This does not prove that the baby is alive at any particular point. You could go on to say that atoms are alive because they struggle to form chemical compounds. Saying something like that does not leave any boundaries toward further advancement to the argument.

Response Point 7: I wish you would provide quotes from this article like I do. Refer to my point 5.

Response Point 8: There is nothing that has either upheld, nor proved that abortion should be illegal. One, since abortion is still legal, than the notion that the prohibition of abortion has been unheld is just wrong, and two, abortion is not and can not be proven illegal since it is legal. Here, you seem to think that abortion is illegal. I want you to look up Roe vs. Wade, than look up the court case that overturned Roe vs. Wade, and made a sweeping law prohibting abortion across the United States.

Response Point 9: I don't think you understood the purpose of that argument. Let me sum it up for you. If abortion is made illegal, than some women are still going to seek abortions, but this time, underground abortions by untrained specialists. This means a higher number of deaths from abortion. If abortion is made illegal, it will not stop abortion. Thus, you have a serious problem.

Response Point 10: What? Your point was not a rebuttal. I have provided proof for my argument that you are wrong.

Response Point 11: Look at my response pont 5. You must provide a differnet rebuttal. I extend my arguments here from the last round into this round.

Response Point 12: What? That is not even a refutation.

Response Point 13: Most women do not feel guilt after an abortion. If they do, sources please.

Response Point 14: I am not saying that all women that get pregnant are going to get breast cancer. What I am trying to say is that a higher PERCENTAGE of women who have a pregnancy have breast cancer than those who have an abortion. Since you have not provided a rebuttal, I extend my arguments here from the last round into this round.

Attack Point 1: This one's a killer. One of the four major factors that decreased crime in the 1990s was abortion: http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu....... "The underlying theory rests on two premises: 1) unwanted children are at greater risk for crime, and 2) legalized abortion leads to a reduction
in the number of unwanted births." :http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu...... "These children who were born because their mothers were denied a nabortion were substantially more likely to be involved in crime, even when controlling for the income, age, education and health of the mother.":http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu....... "For instance, homicide fell 25.9 percent in high-abortion states between 1985 and 1997 compared to an INCREASE of 4.1 percent in low-abortion states. Panel data estimates confiŽrm the strong negative relationship between lagged abortion and crime. An analysis of arrest rates by age reveal that only arrests of those born after abortion legalization are affected by the law change.":http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu....... There are so many great passages on this website to list all here. To have a better understanding of what this article is saying, read the article from the bottom of page 19 to the top of page 21. Also, look at the graphs throughout the article. Here is the article again: http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu....... And no, I can not prove the prohibiting abortion would just increase crime and poverty in the United States, but I can prove the legalizing abortion has decreased crime.

Attack Point 2: Here is some simple logic. "Say abortion is still illegal. Then the 1 million babies aborted each year would raise the unemployment rate tremendously (based on Guttermacher estimates on abortion, unemployment would be between 15-20%). More babies from the 1980s now=a higher unemployment and povery rate." And more simple logic. "Say abortion is still illegal. Than the 56 million babies that would have survived may pay more taxes, but since over 90% are in the bottom 47% of the population (money wise), they don't pay any taxes (Look it up if you doubt me about the 47% not paying taxes). Also, they are sucking up Government Welfare money. So they would increase the Government Debt, not decrease".
lannan13

Con

3. Right to life is appointed to everyone and everything even pets. Why do you think people where POed at Michael Vick when he was doin dog fights
5. theory your website is a theory not a fact, that makes your evidense invaild
6. I never said anything about chemistry, when the babies heart beats that when people know that you're pregnet.
8. abortion isn't ethical just look at Wade V. Boggs
14. you said that abortion lowers chance of reat cancer well you're wrong it raises it by 130% after an abortion now I'm sure women don't want breast cancer if I'm wrong please tell me http://www.deveber.org...
a1. first of all know one ever, why don't you tell the aduiance about FAILED ABORTIONS hum?!
a2. my opponet hasn't refuted my adoption alternartive
a3. with a failed abortion may lead to a prom night dumpster baby.
my attacks.
1. women face emotional difficultis.
2. abortions that fail will lead to several birth defects and defects for the mother
3. increases breast cancer rate by 130%
4. After an abortion, women are more likely to display self-destructive behaviors including suicide
5. lead to depression and guilt for men.
6. abortion reserch is inacurate.
my source for this is http://www.deveber.org...
thank you and have a happy Martin Luther Day
Debate Round No. 3
Ron-Paul

Pro

I have mid-terms this week. I am swamped.

LANNAN13: Can we just skip this round and let the voteres decide on the first three rounds?
lannan13

Con

sure thing Ron-Paul
I don't have mid terms, I've got finals, but not mid terms Good luck
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by wiploc 2 years ago
wiploc
Pro gets the spelling point, for Con's frequent reckless word construction.

Pro was tolerably lucid. Con was hard to figure out. Often, Con just threw out a catch-phrase, without bothering to explain how he thinks it relates to the issue being discussed.

Both parties made cryptic entries like these:

: 8. abortion isn't ethical just look at Wade V. Boggs

: Response Point 12: What? That is not even a refutation.

: 3a. adoption my friend adopition

If the debater's aren't sufficiently concerned with reader comprehension to be willing to say what 8, 12, and 3a are about, we readers aren't likely bother scrolling back up to find out for ourselves.

Pro prevailed on Point 3 (hint: women's right not to have babies if they don't want to). Con's response was to misquote the Declaration and attribute it to the Constitution. Con also misrepresented whether abortion is legal, and Pro called him on that.

Pro prevailed on point 2 (outlawing abortion causes unwanted social effects).

Both sides were lame on the discussion of when life begins.
Posted by Lordknukle 2 years ago
Lordknukle
woot woot I was mentioned
Posted by BluePine 2 years ago
BluePine
I'm new around here but I'm con with this
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by wiploc 2 years ago
wiploc
Ron-Paullannan13Tied
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 Checkmark--1 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: RFD in comments.
Vote Placed by Stephen_Hawkins 2 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
Ron-Paullannan13Tied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Anyone who uses 1 line rebuttals, and conjures up ten clash points is just... fail.