The Instigator
Canada98
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
bballcrook21
Pro (for)
Tied
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/13/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 469 times Debate No: 92709
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

Canada98

Con

Abortion is a tough topic. I believe that abortions should be illegal. There have been proved studies that show during abortion the baby feels pain. It has been proved that 20 weeks after conception a baby can feel pain. Pro will argue that the methods that abortions performed are humane. But there are abortions happening that are far from humane. One type of abortion that is performed is a tube is put into the womb and sucks the baby into it breaking it' s limbs. People would not do this to humans why would they do it to babies? There are other better ways to handle an unexpected pregnancy like giving the child up for adoption.
bballcrook21

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for starting this debate. Good luck to both of us.

As my opponent has already written his opening arguments, and as there are only 2 rounds, I shall write my own in Round 1.


First argument - Lack of Prevention:

The banning of various acts and products only creates more demand for such on the black market, being the illegal purchasing or soliciting of these products and services. This is evident in the sale of drugs, arms, and in historical cases, abortion procedures. Studies show that most abortions come from the poor, as they are least equipped to handle their children, as well as having a higher rate of being raped in their low income neighborhoods. Additionally, the Brookings Institute did a study on abortion, and they concluded that "There are large and widening gaps in rates of unintended childbearing between Americans on different rungs of the income ladder. A poor woman is more than five times as likely as an affluent woman to have an unintended birth. Since unintended childbearing is associated with higher rates of poverty, less family stability, and worse outcomes for children, these gaps further entrench inequality. Closing gaps in unintended childbearing is therefore important for greater equality and opportunity." [1]

This is quite evident as to why there is a desire for abortion, and this is due to the fact that banning abortion doesn't ban abortive procedures, rather banning the state allowance of these abortive procedures. Therefore, it's much better to allow for these women to operate under safe conditions, rather than making silly choices that would bear consequences easily replaced with a legal system for abortion.


In addition to these findings, the data concluded that "here is no 'sex gap' by income. By contrast, lower-income individuals typically use contraception less frequently, and less successfully, than those with higher incomes."[1] This means that lower income individuals happen to use contraceptives less often than higher income individuals, which evidently leads to higher cases of unwanted pregnancy. The issue that arises from such is the fact that lower income individuals make up the most amount of people that receive federal funding through welfare programs, meaning their rapid child bearing will not only have consequences on their own finances and ability to improve but also on the finances of the state, as welfare costs increase with the increase in childbearing.

Second Argument - Murder:

Federally, the act of murder is definied as "Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Every murder perpetrated by poison, lying in wait, or any other kind of willful, deliberate, malicious, and premeditated killing; or committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, any arson, escape, murder, kidnapping, treason, espionage, sabotage, aggravated sexual abuse or sexual abuse, child abuse, burglary, or robbery; or perpetrated as part of a pattern or practice of assault or torture against a child or children; or perpetrated from a premeditated design unlawfully and maliciously to effect the death of any human being other than him who is killed, is murder in the first degree." [2]

This means that so long as the dead specimen in question is not considered a human, it legally is not murder. Scientists conclude that fetuses are not born with the capacity to be defined as a human, therefore the termination of a fetus is not a murder, as it is not a human being.
Debate Round No. 1
Canada98

Con

First of all thank you for your response. In your first argument you mention that if we make abortion illegal people will seek abortion through the black market. This can easily be prevented by putting more support centres and giving people more humane and less violent options that will not harm human life. You also mention that unexpected pregnancies happen in low income neighborhoods. We can prevent this with more education and support for people in this community. By educating people more on unexpected pregnancies we can make people aware of preventing unwanted pregnancies. It's not the child's fault so why are they being punished. In your second argument you give a definition of what murder is. You also mention that " so long as the dead specimen in question is not considered a human, it legally is not murder". First of all there have been studies that the "specimen" is in fact human.

"At 20 weeks, the fetal brain has the full complement of brain cells present in adulthood, ready and waiting to receive pain signals from the body, and their electrical activity can be recorded by standard electroencephalography (EEG)."
" Dr. Paul Ranalli, neurologist, University of Toronto

Having administered anesthesia for fetal surgery, I know that on occasion we need to administer anesthesia directly to the fetus, because even at these early gestational ages the fetus moves away from the pain of the stimulation," stated David Birnbach, M.D., president of the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology and self-described as "pro-choice," in testimony before the U.S. Congress.
bballcrook21

Pro

Contention 1:

"In your first argument you mention that if we make abortion illegal people will seek abortion through the black market. This can easily be prevented by putting more support centres and giving people more humane and less violent options that will not harm human life. "

The only option other than abortion is to not get an abortion. That's essentially it, and certain people do not want to have the burden of carrying a child for 9 months, neither do they want the burden of having to carry a child that could potentially be detrimental to the mother's health, or be conceived out of rape or incest. Additionally, support centers are a much more constly response to a procedure that would be much better financially.



Contention 2:

"You also mention that unexpected pregnancies happen in low income neighborhoods. We can prevent this with more education and support for people in this community."

This is not changed by the fact that abortions are still done by people in other socioeconomic backgrounds, such as middle class women that do not have the need for more children. Contraceptives do not always work, and neither does the idea that one must not be allowed to abort a child that they did not want to have in the first place. If pregnancies weren't such a physical and mental strain on the mother, as well as their significant other, then the debate would go much more smoothly. However, they last 9 months and those months are filled with excrutiating pain and various financial burdens.

Thus, in the cases of maternal illness, rape, unwanted pregancies, and most importantly, birth defects to the child, abortion should be legal in at least these cases, if not more.

Contention 3:


"You also mention that " so long as the dead specimen in question is not considered a human, it legally is not murder". First of all there have been studies that the "specimen" is in fact human."

The federal definition of human is "In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development." [1]

This means that according to law, fetuses are not considered human, making your argument bunk.

Sources:
[1]https://www.law.cornell.edu...


Conclusion:

My opponent has failed to cite and how a SINGLE credible source, therefore I can only assume that he does not have one. Additionally, he has argued irrationally and illogically, and presented arguments that I have disproved in my won contentions.

Please vote for Pro.
Debate Round No. 2
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by whiteflame 5 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: SJM// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Pro (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: I felt pro successfully refuted con's arguments and that he also had more persuasiveness in his arguments.

[*Reason for removal*] This RFD is too overgeneralized. The voter is required to specifically assess arguments made by both sides in the debate as part of assessing arguments. Assessments that one side refuted the other's arguments and was "more persuasive" require more than just a blanket statement by the voter.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 5 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: TheWorldIsComplicated// Mod action: Removed<

6 points to Pro (Conduct, Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Pro provided much more information and had more valid points. The Pro successfully debunked Con's points.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) The voter doesn't explain conduct. (2) The explanation for arguments and sources is too overgeneralized. The voter is required to specifically assess arguments made by both sides in the debate as part of assessing arguments, and must assess the reliability of the evidence and not just its amount to determine source points.
************************************************************************
Posted by Jamais23 5 months ago
Jamais23
As a matter of fact, a baby's heart forms inside the womb when it is 4 weeks old. Generally, I don't support abortion but to keep the population controlled especially in the third world countries where lots of babies end up dying anyways or growing up in hard times, we have no choice but to legalize it.
Posted by Canada98 5 months ago
Canada98
Vote Con!!!!!!!
No votes have been placed for this debate.