The Instigator
Ariesx
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
jared8844
Pro (for)
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 1 vote the winner is...
Ariesx
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/31/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 276 times Debate No: 85846
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

Ariesx

Con

Round 1-Acceptance, Round 2-Cases, Round 3-Rebuttals, Round 4-Defense
We will be arguing strictly from a moral perspective not a legal perspective. I will claim that abortion is immoral, while my opponent argues that it is the right thing to do.
jared8844

Pro

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
Ariesx

Con

Abortion-the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy.
Morality-principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.

Fetus killing-Without getting into the science of it, we can all agree that in abortion the fetus is terminated. We can all agree that once a fetus is terminated, than it is gone. We can all agree that once the fetus is gone the baby is gone. If I was aborted, than I would not be here. If my opponent was aborted, than he would not be here. This is the truth. One cannot debate this. These are simple truths that cannot be disputed. Most people would define it to be immoral to kill somebody. That is a simple truth. I will be arguing that abortion is a basically cheating somebody out of their existence.

Life-Let us just say for the sake of the debate that you were making a decision to either get your wife or yourself an abortion. You are making a decision for someone's life. If you chose to take the abortion, it is a simple fact that you will never have the child you just aborted. If you choose not to take the abortion, than the child will be born. These are simple facts.

I know that Pro might try to say that people that usually get abortions are in financial harm. That is irrelevant, because killing someone outweighs financial harm. This is a strictly moral debate.
jared8844

Pro

I agree with pro's stance that there's nothing more morally wrong than taking the gift of life away from an unborn for ostensibly financial reasons. Our future is our greatest asset, and it is unjustifiably wrong to abort a fetus that can have a valuable future.

With that being said, I believe that there are cases where an abortion is perfectly ethical. In particular, it is when the rarest circumstance occurs when killing the unborn would save the life of the mother that the mother should make the moral call to abort her fetus. The consequence of not taking such an abortion would be morally wrong, as it would take away the simultaneous life of both, the unborn and the mother herself. And if through the doctor's careful treatment of the mother"s illness the pre-born patient inadvertently dies or is injured, this is tragic and, if unintentional, is not unethical.

You can view one of a case that I've described here: http://www.usatoday.com...

Therefore, in my opponent's words, abortion is sometimes "the right thing to do" because if both lives cannot be simultaneously saved, then the mother's life must be our primary aim. Everything I have said so far is consistent with the pro-life ethic. Again, the bottom line is, abortion should always be prohibited in cases where the life of the mother, and simultaneously the baby, is threatened.
Debate Round No. 2
Ariesx

Con

Ariesx forfeited this round.
jared8844

Pro

bernie 2016
Debate Round No. 3
Ariesx

Con

Ariesx forfeited this round.
jared8844

Pro

jared8844 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Assassin801x 9 months ago
Assassin801x
Ariesxjared8844Tied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Con was better in his arguments