The Instigator
jfdr94
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Mikal
Pro (for)
Winning
25 Points

Abortion

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 5 votes the winner is...
Mikal
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/7/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 742 times Debate No: 45417
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (5)

 

jfdr94

Con

Abortion should be illegal
Debate Round No. 1
jfdr94

Con

Abortion should be illegal for many reasons for one its inhumane to take a human life especially when one is vulnerable and defenseless.I believe human life starts at conception therefore i believe the baby is living making abortion murder.Can you please explain the reason why you support abortion
Mikal

Pro

I would like to thank pro for starting this debate so lets get right into it



Definitions

Abortion - the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: as [1]

Illegal - contrary to or forbidden by law, esp. criminal law. [1]


So we are debating the act of abortion should be forbidden by law or not allowed.



Premises

[P1] Making abortion illegal would mean banning it in all circumstances
[P2] If there is a time in which an abortion can be justified it should remain legal
[P3] Therefore abortion should not be illegal



Defense of Premise 1

This speaks for itself but basically per the resolution, we are debating about making abortion illegal across the board. It clearly states it should be illegal and should be banned by law.


Defense of Premise 2

As I said my job in this is to show that there are some situations that can justify an abortion, but here are just a few.

Fatal Pregnancies.

Ecoptic pregnancies are rare pregnancies in where the egg implants itself somewhere outside the uterus. In addition to being outside of the uterus the mother generally can die. [2]

Right to self defense

According to US law this is essentially the right of another citizen to engage in violent behavior up and to ending another individuals life when the person in question is acting in sufficient self defense. [3]


Justifiable Homicide

Justifiable Homicide - killing without evil or criminal intent, for which there can be no blame, such as self-defense to protect oneself or to protect another, or the shooting by a law enforcement officer in fulfilling his/her duties. This is not to be confused with a crime of passion or claim of diminished capacity which refer to defenses aimed at reducing the penalty or degree of crime [4]


Wrapping it up

Essentially when a fetus is posing a life threatening condition to the mother it is her right to terminate the baby. She has every right to defend her body against the attack, in this case the fetus.


Defense of Premise 3

This has already been essentially done above. Read defense of premise 2 for more details, but abortion should remain legal especially in cases where the mother could die.


Conclusion

The resolution is false. Abortion should remain legal







[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...
[2] http://www.mayoclinic.org...
[3] http://www.princeton.edu...
[4] http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...








Debate Round No. 2
jfdr94

Con

When I talk about abortion I am not talking about Ectopic pregnancies that rarely happen and only makes up to 1 percent of all abortions. When I talk about illegalizing abortion I am talking about the other 97% . IDK how this society can accuse of man with double murder while killing a pregnant woman but don't charge the woman who can kill the same baby with nothing . I like the fact you abortion supporters only talk bout the ectopic pregnancies or rape incidents when they only make up only 3% percent of all abortions. Lets see there are 1.2 millions baby aborted annually that means everyday there are at least more than 3,000 babies aborted daily and 97% have nothing to do with the mothers health or the babies well being this all done because they cant afford it or the baby would get in the way of their school or great plans . or their spouses pressured them into doing it and etc.. The point is Abortion is Murder because what is Murder basically means to kill a person who is innocent and idk whats more innocent than a baby in the womb.
Mikal

Pro

I am going to keep it short because pro just conceded most of my round. Since we are talking about making abortion illegal it would not be limited to a specific situation but all types of abortion. Even those I mentioned in the prior round.

Con claims abortion is murder , but again I refer you to my prior round. If the mother is danger, the act of murder is justifiable in that situation. She would be acting in self defense to preserve her life and safety, thus meaning abortion should remain legal

There is no much left to argue, because Con dropped almost all of my contentions and just said that abortion should be illegal because it is being misused and is considered murder. I have shown how and why abortion can be considered moral, ethically permissible, and be justified by the law.

I would like to thank con for this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by missmedic 2 years ago
missmedic
That is the wrong way to go Punishment for abortion is not a deterrent or a cure and its immoral. Proper education in human sexuality would do a far better job at preventing unwanted pregnancy, but sadly only abstinence is taught, this is not enough. This explains why Christians like yourself expend more moral energy opposing abortion than fighting for proper sex education. You believe that your religious concerns about sex have something to do with morality. And yet, your efforts are almost never geared towards the relief of human suffering. This prudery of yours contributes daily to the surplus of human misery.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by UltimateRussian 2 years ago
UltimateRussian
jfdr94MikalTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:32 
Reasons for voting decision: Honestly pros points are just a matter of opinion and your only point con dint counter was illegal means completely illegal which is a nobody and poor tactic for debating con i gladly give you these points though you deserve more :)
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 2 years ago
Krazzy_Player
jfdr94MikalTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did not make sufficient arguments regarding his stance and did not refuted Pro's arguments thus coming into the conclusion the greater part of the debate was conceded by Con.
Vote Placed by jhenley9111 2 years ago
jhenley9111
jfdr94MikalTied
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: Do I have to say why?
Vote Placed by BeckyDawg 2 years ago
BeckyDawg
jfdr94MikalTied
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: Con failed to recognize potential risks to abortion, both direct and indirect. Kudos to Pro for good arguments.
Vote Placed by MyDinosaurHands 2 years ago
MyDinosaurHands
jfdr94MikalTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con loses S&G for using stuff like 'IDK'. Mikal wins the argument, because while Con could harp all he wanted about the 97%, he never justified why the 3% should be abused, which is what would happen under a blanket ban, he never justifies why a complete ban would be better for overall than a partial ban. Con loses sources, because Mikal used 4 more than he did to back up his arguments.