The Instigator
hunnydew
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mak-zie
Pro (for)
Winning
18 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 3 votes the winner is...
Mak-zie
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/8/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 648 times Debate No: 21836
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

hunnydew

Con

a debate I think just needs to get out of the way
so we can talk about more important morel problems.
Mak-zie

Pro

As much as I'd like to start debating now, my opponent needs to clear the air here. For instance: What side will I be debating and what side will my opponent be debating? What definition of "abortion" does my opponent wish to set this debate on?
As my opponent is fairly new to this, I'll say this: The first round is used to clarify your stance on the topic, and to clarify the topic itself. "a debate I think just needs to get out of the way so we can talk about more important morel problems" does not help either of those.

I shall assume that I am debating for abortion, the definition being: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus.
However, I cannot be sure, and I would appreciate very much if my opponent would clarify this.
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Debate Round No. 1
hunnydew

Con

I will be representing the fact that I'm agents abortion
pls read my comment
Mak-zie

Pro

My opponents response to my question in round one: "I'm going to be agents abortion, as terminating a poignancy without the mother having a high risk of death."
I won't even begin to touch upon the horrendous spelling, or the fact that my opponent chose to debate his second round in the comments, but rather that what we were debating about wasn't resolved until round two, leaving very little room for debating and rebuttals. It is the responsibility of the "instigator" to explain everything in the first round. This, at the very least, should be a loss of a conduct point.

This also makes things very things very abusive to the "contender," or me. My opponent wants me to debate "why abortion is good, when the mother doesn't have a high risk of death." This takes away one of my main arguments, and designed to make Con's win easy. Con wanted to take away a major argument factor, in order to win. Nevertheless, I intend to include this in my argument, as this was not included in the first round, not even in this debate AT ALL, mind you.

Arguments:
1. The fetus could have an abnormality, and would be easier for the mother to have an abortion than to go through all that pain and the baby be stillborn, and also leading to attachment issues.
2. If a woman is sick with a disease, then she would have a procedure to help her recover from something tragic. Abortion is the same. If it helps it save a woman's life and help her get over whatever harmful things led her to the pregnancy, than it is good. A woman is more than a fetus: a fetus cannot make decisions for itself, a woman can, so therefore, a woman needs to make that decision.
3. Think about this: there is a reason that abortion is legal, and you can argue the other way all you want, but because it is legal means something.
4. If abortion wasn't legal, then women would be getting abortions illegally, like they were before Roe vs. Wade (The Supreme Court case that made abortions legal). This is highly dangerous.
5. Furthermore, everyone should have the right to choose, because most of the time, they know what's best for themselves, versus other people. They should not be legally forced to carry a baby.

Sources:
http://www.feministe.us...
http://civilliberty.about.com...
http://socialistworker.org...

*My opponent has never said that I have to argue that abortion is good in every circumstance.*
Debate Round No. 2
hunnydew

Con

hunnydew forfeited this round.
Mak-zie

Pro

I see that my opponent has given actually no argument against abortion at all, so I get arguments.

What little words my opponent has written, they have misspelled. Such as "morel" and "agents" ( which in the sentence is supposed to be against). I get spelling.

My opponent has forfeited a round, thus losing conduct.

I have three sources, my opponent has none, I get sources.

Therefore, vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by hunnydew 4 years ago
hunnydew
I'm going to be agents abortion, as terminating a poignancy without the mother having a high risk of death.
Posted by RichakaBullet 4 years ago
RichakaBullet
im also against abortion cuz its wrong.
Posted by ddiaz141 4 years ago
ddiaz141
so are you against abortion?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Xerge 4 years ago
Xerge
hunnydewMak-zieTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit....
Vote Placed by TUF 4 years ago
TUF
hunnydewMak-zieTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeits.
Vote Placed by Buddamoose 4 years ago
Buddamoose
hunnydewMak-zieTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was only one that actually argued: Pro wins