Debate Rounds (4)
Hello! I will accept your debate.
Just so you know, I am anti-abortion but pro-choice. In other words, the topic of abortion is unpleasant to me, but I'm for a woman's right to choose. As we know, being "pro-abortion" in the most literal sense means that you believe the default when a woman becomes pregnant should be abortion. And nobody, not even the most pro-choice people, thinks that. If you're confused on my stance, read this: http://www.miamiherald.com...
Looking forward to a great debate!
Most abortions are the result of unprotected sex, Irresponsible sexual behaviour and stupidity and for that the living infant human being must be sucked out of the womb via a vacuum, this is extremely painful for the child as he/she gets literally ripped apart. A survey conducted in 2004 concluded that 74% of woman that have an abortion claim that it's because the baby would change life for the new mother, which is ridiculous they could have just put the baby up for adoption. Only 1% of abortions are because of rape and if the reason is for rape, why should the baby die for the man's crime? The baby can just be given up for adoption. Not only does the baby die for a stupid reason but he/she dies inhumanely.
First of all, a minor clarification. You keep referring to the fetus as a baby; it is not. It is a fetus.
Next I would like to point out a few inaccuracies. You say that the process is "extremely painful" for the child. This is simply not true. Depending on which source you use, the fetus is able to feel pain at sometime between 20-24 weeks following conception.  91% of all abortions are performed in the first trimester, and only 0.1% of abortions are performed after 24 weeks.  So your claim about fetal pain is simply not true.
Just out of curiosity: what is your stance on abortions if childbirth would cause the mother to die? What if the fetus has some sort of birth defect that would cause it to die as soon as it was born? What about abortions performed because of incest?
About adoption: you have a good point. But adoption and foster care services are not able to handle a new influx of children.
"Currently, there are close to 400,000 children in state custody; only half have permanent plans for placement. Meanwhile, employees in protective services are underpaid and overworked, treading water to try to ensure that all of the children in their care are happy and healthy. Anyone who believes that adoption or foster care is a natural solution to growing restrictions on reproductive rights is kidding themselves." 
Finally, just as a more practical point, legalized abortion lowered crime rates. Since most abortions are from unwanted pregnancies or because the mother feels that she wouldn't be able to be a good parent, children born from mothers that would have liked to get an abortion are likely to not receive the care and support they need. This leads to problems in education down the line, and results eventually in higher crime rates. 
As a conclusion: The baby does not feel pain, is not conscious, cannot perceive its surroundings, and it's up for debate as to whether it is alive or not (in an ethical sense). I thus argue that abortion continue to be legal as it respects women's rights and prevents crime.
Looking forward to your responses!
My stances: If the mother's life depended on it (which is only 0.1% of the time) then it's the mother's choice because it's her life that hangs in the balance but only when she's absolutely going to die without a single doubt. If the child has a birth defect that's not a valid reason to kill him/her. How do you know the child is going to live a terrible life or die right away I've heard stories of this sort of thing where the child is expected to die but survives and lives a happy life. Abortion because of rape: only 1% of abortions are this reason, my question: Why should the baby have to die for the crime?
Adoption: So your solution to this is just to kill them?
Crime rates: If you're concerned about the crime rates being to high and your solution is just to kill the babies before they can do anything, then we shouldn't stop there we should kill every criminal that's ever done anything bad or even is suspected of doing anything bad. Remember 99% of the time the mother already made the choice by choosing to have sex.
The baby is alive (how can it feel pain and not be alive?). The baby is conscious as he/she can react to noise, light and touch. Every human being should have rights including the unborn humans.
I look forward to your response.
First of all, I'm not "calling it whatever I want." Fetus is the scientific name for an unborn animal or human.  So I'm not trying to dehumanize it; I'm simply using accurate language. You are the one who is using inaccurate language to further your own case, which is a subset of the judgmental language fallacy, a type of red herring.  It is not a baby, as "baby" refers to the fetus after it has been born. By that same logic, a fetus is not a child. Please refer to it as a fetus in the future.
Thank you for clarifying your stances. I notice you left out the one about incest, though. What are your thoughts on this?
About rape: the child was not the mother's autonomous decision, therefore she cannot be expected to raise it, care for it, or go through painful and possibly dangerous childbirth for it. As it was not her choice, she should be able to get an abortion. You expect women to carry the weight after she is violently assaulted by a dangerous criminal? Shame on you.
Adoption: No, not necessarily. I'm simply pointing out that for many women, it's not a feasible option.
Again, I'm not advocating killing babies or criminals. I'm simply pointing out that crime rates went down when abortion was legalized, and the study I cited proves causation. I'm not calling for anything to be done, I'm just pointing out a practical benefit.
Yes, I know the fetus is alive. But only biologically. Whether or not it's alive from an ethical standpoint is another question. I like to think of it as somewhat like the debate regarding euthanasia. Yes, the patient is biologically living. But they're completely brain-dead as well. It's somewhat similar with a fetus. It cannot feel pain or sense anything at the time when most abortions are performed, and it is not conscious.
Thank you for the debate and I look forward to your rebuttals.
Rape: I believe everyone has the right to life even the unborn human. The unborn human is not the mother's body because it has different DNA and often a different blood type. Therefore the fetus is not apart of the mother but a body within a body.
The fetus is alive and who are you to decide whether or not he/she can continue to live?
I end my part in the debate, thank you for debating me.
And to the voters; think about this, vote con
I'm going to leave you with this:
I thank my opponent for using accurate terms this round.
The trouble with abortion debates is that it all comes down to when, from an ethical standpoint, life begins. You have not given any proof that the fetus is ethically alive; I have: it is not conscious, it cannot feel pain or perceive sensory information until viability, etc. I realize that this is not sufficient proof that the fetus is alive from an ethical standpoint; thus I believe that this debate has ended in a stalemate. Neither of us has given substantial evidence that the fetus is ethically alive.
Thus we must move on to practical standpoints. You have dropped my argument about crime and adoption, and instead replace it with an argument from assertion (another logical fallacy) that the fetus is alive, which you have failed to prove. I have dropped none of your arguments.
As neither of us has proven that abortion is immoral or moral, it is a stalemate on that count. However, I have submitted several practical arguments, both of which you have dropped. Thus I strongly urge voters to VOTE PRO.
Thank you for the debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by warren42 1 month ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: I give Pro this win because, like he/she said, Con was never able to prove from an ethical standpoint that the fetus was alive. Though Con was able to prove that the fetus could react to certain stimuli, Pro countered this by proving the fetus unable to feel pain. Ethical viewpoint is a wash. Pro ends up winning by proving that there is inability to accommodate would-be aborted children into the adoption/foster care system, as well as the legalization of abortion lowering crime rates. Practical standpoint won by Pro. Though a firm link between abortions moral/practical outcomes and making it good/bad to outlaw and punish was not established by either side, I operated under the assumption that if abortion was proven a net harm/immoral it should be outlawed/punished, while if proven a net benefit/not immoral, it should not be outlawed/punished. Therefore my vote is cast for Con.
Vote Placed by Overhead 1 month ago
|Who won the debate:||-||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Both sides make generic arguments about abortion (PRO's better sourced and argued than CONs) but neither really links it together into a framework to show that Abortion is/isn't murder and should/shouldn't be a punishable crime. Does the argument that "74% of woman that have an abortion claim that it's because the baby would change life for the new mother" mean abortion is murder? Or the point that "legalized abortion lowered crime rates" mean that abortion isn't murder? There's no obvious connection to me and neither side built one. The argument from both sides should have taken the form "Murder is defined as X, abortion is X/Y therefore abortion is/isn't murder". Gotta votes tied.
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.