Debate Rounds (3)
I stand on the pro side of abortion.
My opp. stands on the con side.
1st round acceptance.
When Women come into the workplace- When a man comes into the workplace to begin a career, a man does not have to worry about becoming impregnated and having to miss work due to his pregnant body. An employer can be more male oriented in the choice of what sex to work for the workplace. When a women gets out of school similar to a man and begins a career that is around the same time when her and her counterpart begin a career. That is also around the time where a women is likely to become pregnant. 25-32. Hence why a man might be choosed over a woman in who to work for the company or workplace. Now I am not stating here that just because a woman is starting a job she should have an abortion to protect her career if she is employed but note that having the ability to have a child can negate a woman's chances in securing and working in a the workforce. Just the ability is dangerous.
Source: Privilege Power and Difference
"In the understandable attempt to find the game-winning argument that proves your side 100% of the time, we as debaters have delved out of the realistic zone of our world and delved into argumentation that hardly applies to our modern society, if ever. The answer to the question of whether abortion should be allowed in our society, in my opinion, is rather simple. It comes down to one principle that I feel we acknowledge exists without ever giving it thought:
Treat others how you wish to be treated." .
Source: Zaridi (debate.org) (spelling name may be wrong-Sorry )
Treat others how you wish to be treated is a good idea for someone with morals in why to not have an abortion. But that is it, it is just an idea that stands alone. It is similar to a MLK stance on racism.- Turn the other cheek when hit. Now it is a luxury to treat others how I wish to be treated. In many places in the world that luxury of treating others fairly goes out the window. He did state society so I will not debate whether the idea is right or wrong because it is neither but will expand the idea into non society which can be likened to third world countries.
"In 2008, 84.3% of all abortions were performed on unmarried women (CDC)."
"Women between the ages of 20-24 obtained 33% of all abortions in 2008; women between 25-29 obtained 24% (CDC)."
"In 2008, adolescents under 15 years obtained .05% of all abortions, but had the highest abortion ratio, 821 abortions for every 1,000 live births (CDC)."
47% of women who have abortions had at least one previous abortion (AGI).
"Black women are more than 4.8 times more likely than non-Hispanic white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are 2.7 times as likely (AGI)."
"In 1972 (the year before abortion was federally legalized), a total of 24 women died from causes known to be associated with legal abortions, and 39 died as a result of known illegal abortions (CDC)."
"42 Million abortions occur yearly".
Well why so much? Perhaps it is for the mothers common good.
I do not state 42 million children would be criminals regarding the freaknomics theseis at the end of my writing. But many people who have had abortion, are not sociopaths out to spread the blood of the innocent, but do not have a silver spoon in their mouth. If I was to have child and could become impreganated. I would put the child for adoption. But I have the luxury to type on a computer, and know what that is. Now that is U.S. statistics.
"Women in certain countries, who have a child are putting themselves at risk. These countries are developing or underdeveloped countries."
"Nearly half of all abortions worldwide are unsafe, and nearly all unsafe abortions (98%) occur in developing countries. In the developing world, 56% of all abortions are unsafe, compared with just 6% in the developed world."
"In 2008, more than 97% of abortions in Africa were unsafe. Southern Africa is the subregion with the lowest proportion of unsafe abortions (58%) . Close to 90% of women in the subregion live in South Africa, where abortion was liberalized in 1997"
Furthering when women have a child there is an attachment to that child. If she has an abortion there is a connection from mother to child regarding that child. Many people paint a picture that when a woman has a child there is no connection to that child. Or that the abortion occurs sadistically without feeling. That last sentence is false because there is a connection and there is feeling towards that soon to be unborn baby.
Treat others as you wish to be treated falls apart in countries like Somalia, Liberia, Iraq post Hussein, etc. The Hobbes state of Nature is occurring in places on earth and the treat others as you wish to be treated never comes into the play of cards. The Hobbes State of nature is a place where someone has a right to someone elses body. It is nasty, short, and brute. It is a place of no time or industry. It is hell on earth.
Now the majority of locations where women have an abortion is not the U.S. or a built up over industrialized country. It is a developing or underdeveloped country as my statistics point out. A place where the Hobbes State of Nature exists. IF a woman who is takes a risk to abort a child when she can likely die from the abortion (unsafe abortions) who am I to tell her that she is wrong. Perhaps I have the luxury of a laptop and a computer, a home, a school schedule, a job, society and so forth. The woman in the third world country having the abortion is already in hell and by risking her life to have an abortion is her choice and no one elses.
Why is it happening so much?-The abortions. It is in the best interest of the woman to have an abortion in these third world countries where the golden rule is non existent due to the Hobbes state of nature. It is not sociopathic, or sadistic on the mothers part. If a mother is going to risk her life for an abortion should I go to Africa and tell her that she is wrong and a murderer. Murderer as many pro life people would paint the picture of a mother who is having an abortion.
The golden rule applies to society. Take U.S. society. The rule I instate is that people are equal and are innately the same. Who has the right to tell someone else what they are doing is wrong or what they or doing is right. Similar to this debate. I am not right and neither is my opp. The U.S. is not a democracy it is a republic. Elected officials represent pro life and pro choice. Instead of this the U.S. should progress to having a vote on abortion by the people's ballot. But if this would happen it would have to be truly democratic. A democracy as Locke defined was that person A does not vote for person A selfishly but votes for person b and person c, hence the common good. If the U.S. people could vote for the common good and are capable of doing this through thinking and reasoning I instate that there should be a national vote on abortion, however I do not believe the people in this society can firmly live in a true democracy hence the republic is what the U.S. is composed of. The golden rule of treating others and you would like to be treated works well in many cases. But take the person who does not have the ability to learn and comes from a drained community.
I have the luxury of knowing how to spell adoption.
I have the luxury of a home.
I have the luxury of being able to obtain an education.
I have the privilege of being white in a racists society. (Society source = Privelege Power and Difference)
Not everyone in society has privileges but are oppressed. Take a 14 year old girl who lives in a ghetto located near the reader. She does not know the golden rule. She might not be able to spell her name. Therefore she does not know how to spell adoption. Henceforth she does not know what that is.
She is not a sociopath bent on spreading the blood of the innocence. But by having a child that child would destroy her future. Future being getting ahead in life. Getting out of the ghetto. Going to school. Through an abortion she protects her own common good of survival. The upper hand was not given to her at her birth and by having a birth as a kid that would be a kid producing a kid forth, having a kid would negate her life.
The controversial Freakanomics Thesis. Due to increased abortions the crime rate dropped in a certain time period. I do not personally agree with this fully but wanted to bring it into the debate for the viewer to make their decision. Again this thesis generated a lot of heat in the academic world and societies in general.
Abortion keeps the population down. It is a tool that other people benefit off of. Sounds harsh, because it is. But what is harsh is that humans are the species that has ruined the earth and changed the earth the most out of every other species. The earth knows that human beings are harsh. According to the U.S. census bureau the
U.S. will still progress from 313,647,797 by atleast 450 million people in 2050. The world population will increase dramatically as well. The U.S. people use a ton of resources compared to other countries and that could be deemed a worldly crime. Not to be sadistic in my next clause, but abortions can be looked at as a tool that is beneficial for the people already livning on an overpopulated Earth. Human beings currently are using more than one earth and a half of an earth for their daily living. Well that other half of earth does not exist and the one were on is going down the tubes.
Not everyone has the ability to have an adoption, or even know what that is.
People are people. People are Equal innately in ability. Who can tell someone what to do with their body when peole are generally equal.
Women having the ability to have an abortion liberates women in a patriarchal society. By society owning a woman's body that would be slavery. Who has the right justly to someone else's body?
The Golden rule is a grand rule in many areas but can not apply to everyone. Some people cannot spell to know that rule in society. Out of society the rule ceases to exist in many cases.
I live in NJ a extremely populate state in an extremely dense area. My mother once broker her wrist as she collapsed on a side walk on a main road. And I mean a main road. She had to crawl a quarter of a football field back to the house where I found her. As cars went by, police, ambulance, commuters, etc, no one came and helped out. My point here is that I affirm that the U.S. cannot vote for the common good regarding abortion in a democratic ballot. People cannot even help another person out, how can they vote appropriately on A side or B side of the debate. So this debate will continue to be pursued by a republican who gets votes for A side and a democrat who gets vote for being on B side, furthering no resolution that is so very fond of the roots that come with a democrat and republican.
Calvincambridge forfeited this round.
My opp FFed that round possibly due to work hence I will just extend what I have already written rather than introduce new stuff to give my opp. a fair shot, to get my opp's arguments in. Not to be overloaded.
brief points: 1 By outlawing abortions it impedes on a women's right. Slavery is when someone owns someone else's body. Hence women in a paternalistic Earth who are oppressed due to sex or gender already by gaining their right to their body by utilizing abortion is pro women. Further, outlawing will only increase unsafe abortions.
2 Adoption is not available for every single woman on planet earth---ie. Liberia. Why is a women going to risk her life in Liberia to have an abortion when their is such a high mortality rate due to the increasing unsafe abortions?
new- 3 adding onto 1, What is being aborted? Is it a human or is it not a human? Humans interact with each other. Humans demonstrate capabilities. A fetus that is not a human yet or possess any or vary in mortal qualities should be rightfully aborted by a woman. Many pro lifers state that murder occurs when the fetus is aborted, however the fetus has no ability for living, if killed it is not even a crime because genocide did not occur due to the fetus not having the ability in continuance. Source:Deathbeforedishonor.
I read the point on the fetus and found it to be entertaining so I just wanted to put it into the cards here.
Generally Abortion debates are cliche but that point (3) was intersting by the debater and I have not heard that idea yet.
Calvincambridge forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
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.