The Instigator
Valladarex
Pro (for)
Winning
16 Points
The Contender
msaka33
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 3 votes the winner is...
Valladarex
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/28/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 781 times Debate No: 35995
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (3)

 

Valladarex

Pro

This will be a debate on when abortion should and should not be legal. My opponent can be for or against abortion, as my position could allow for contentions from both sides. *edit* My opponent must support another model for the legality of abortion.

Resolution: Abortion should be legal until the fetus has brain activity (approximately 8 weeks gestation). Abortion would then be illegal after this point.

There will be 4 rounds, 8000 character limit.

First round acceptance only.

I hope for a great debate!
msaka33

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for posting this debate and I accept.

I am personally against abortion unless the mother is a condition in which she can't handle the pregnancy
Debate Round No. 1
Valladarex

Pro


Opening Statements


I thank my opponent for accepting this debate, and I hope for a good discussion. To start off, I will define two words that will come up later in my arguments.


Human: (n.): A member of the genus Homo and especially of the species H. sapiens. (adj.): Having or showing those positive aspects of nature and character regarded as distinguishing humans from other animals. (1)


Person: A human or organization with legal rights and duties. (2)


Arguments


Human vs. Person


In order for my arguments to make sense, there must first be a distinction between what is human and what is a person. This may seem counterintuitive, as the term human is generally considered equivalent to a person, but it's actually more complex than this.


First, a human who ceases to have brain activity is not a person, even if the non-brain parts of the body is still functioning using life support. Once a person stops having brain activity, the person is considered officially dead (3).


Next, various things that are human are still not persons. Individual cells, DNA, and body parts are human in nature, but are not protected as people under law. These things make up a person, whom would be protected by law.


Finally, sperm cells and egg cells are not people. They are human, and have the potential to create a person, but are not protected under law individually.


Personhood


With these terms clarified, we can now discuss what ought to be considered a person. There are many thresholds which people have come up with to determine when personhood begins, but it is still very much in debate today. You believe abortions should be illegal "unless the mother is a condition in which she can't handle the pregnancy." I can infer from this that you believe the point of conception, or the fusion of gametes to initiate the development of a human, is the beginning of human personhood, and therefore entitled to the right of life. Also, the only justification in aborting the newly-formed zygote is if a person of equal value, the mother, would be at risk of death from attempting to give birth to the would-be baby.


So, why not choose fertilization as the starting point? My argument for brain activity as the beginning of personhood is founded on that idea that our minds are what make us ourselves. Our individuality, consciousness, characteristics, and livelihood are not just simply attached to the genetic and cellular foundations from fertilization. We require more than that. An active brain is needed for us completely fulfill these ideas of being a person.


Not only does brain activity make a good indicator for when we are living people, but it is consistent with our definition of when we are dead. As I explained earlier, our definition of death is dependent on when brain activity ceases. If this is when we consider someone dead, why not be the determiner of when someone is alive? The most reasonable thing to do is to have a consistent set of ethics and make brain activity the beginning of personhood.


Conclusion


For all the ideas of when personhood should begin, brain activity would be the most reasonable. To quote a doctor named John Goldenring, "By accepting a functioning brain as a medical definition for humanness, one can achieve a very reasonable, scientifically grounded and consistent view of human life. Such a definition allows us to look at all of life from the development of a single cell to the death of the last cell in a body in the same way. We need not encounter any logical dilemmas if we apply a brain-life test and we can use it as an instrument to aid policy and ethical decisions."(4)


I look forward to your response!


Sources


1. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...


2. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...


3. http://pntb.org...


4. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


msaka33

Con

msaka33 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Valladarex

Pro

Looks like my opponent has been on for some time. Hopefully he'll come back..
msaka33

Con

msaka33 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Valladarex

Pro

Guess not.
msaka33

Con

msaka33 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Valladarex 3 years ago
Valladarex
For those who are willing to follow the debate format, you may now accept.
Posted by Valladarex 3 years ago
Valladarex
Still looking for an opponent!

To lenoardlewish4, you would also have to support a different time frame for when it should be legal, if at all.
Posted by leonardlewis4 3 years ago
leonardlewis4
I would simply challenge your resolution, requiring that you provide a sufficient warrant for your position on two fronts:

1. Why should abortion be legal prior to 8 weeks gestation and/or detection of brain activity?

2. Why should abortion be illegal only after 8 weeks gestation and/or detection of brain activity?
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
A little too late, as there's already applicants. However I'd argue in just having them be legal well into the forth trimester. It worked in Sparta!
Posted by Valladarex 3 years ago
Valladarex
@Lil_bit

I would like my opponent to have a different model for the legality of abortion. So yes, my opponent must support a different time frame for when abortion should be legal, if at all.
Posted by Valladarex 3 years ago
Valladarex
@supercooper1988

I said my opponent can be for abortion, not that they could have my position. This means that the opponent could believe in a different marker to determine when abortion should not be legal, if at all.
Posted by JustinAMoffatt 3 years ago
JustinAMoffatt
I totally didn't see the "comment if you'd like to accept"....
Sorrrrry. XD
I feel like an idiot.
Posted by Lil_bit 3 years ago
Lil_bit
I would love to accept this debate on the Con side. However I have a question. Being Con, am I simply stating it doesn't matter when you have an abortion or am I going to need to offer a different time frame as to when an abortion is appropriate? Basically, would I be focusing on the first or second part of the resolution? Please get back to me on this because I'm really interested in taking this debate.
Posted by Supercooper1988 3 years ago
Supercooper1988
I would like to accept this debate. I'd be taking the side of pro, saying that it is legal up till the point of 8 weeks, and from then be illegal.
Posted by JustinAMoffatt 3 years ago
JustinAMoffatt
Can't accept. I would've.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Nataliella 3 years ago
Nataliella
Valladarexmsaka33Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: FF, and Pro used more sources.
Vote Placed by lannan13 3 years ago
lannan13
Valladarexmsaka33Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
Valladarexmsaka33Tied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.