The Instigator
TruthSeeker87
Con (against)
The Contender
LoncYourDoors
Pro (for)

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
LoncYourDoors has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/18/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 402 times Debate No: 98204
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

TruthSeeker87

Con

Abortion should be made illegal in all of the US and no longer considered "a woman's right". Scientifically speaking, unborn children (fetuses) are just as human as born children and should have the same legal protection against murder.
LoncYourDoors

Pro

A fetus inside a woman does not deserve the same rights as an autonomous being living on its own. Try to think of it like this: if you wanted to donate a part of your liver (a non self-sustaining structure that you can donate a part of and still be fine) and signed legal paperwork affirming your decision, then would anyone consider taking up picket signs and protesting? The liver, after all, has the same basic potential as a fetus, to provide human life. The early fetus would die just as quickly outside of its mother as the liver, and has the same basic potential as the liver, so why should it have more rights than the liver?
Debate Round No. 1
TruthSeeker87

Con

A liver does not have the same potential as a human fetus. It's an organ. It cannot grow or develop into another stage and will never have the ability to sustain its own individual life. A newborn is also dependent on another to survive and would die if left on its own, yet it's illegal and considered immoral by most people to directly kill it or leave it to die. Our humanity, the very characteristic that dictates our value and right to life, is not defined by our degree of dependence for survival.
LoncYourDoors

Pro

The point I was trying to illustrate was that a fetus that cannot live a normal life if extracted should be considered in the same way as an internal organ that cannot live on its own. To be explicitly clear, a fetus in the last week of the pregnancy has the same rights as a newborn because it could easily live a normal life if taken out this instant (recall this qualification whenever I use the word "fetus"). A five-centimetre-long fetus would quickly die if extracted from a woman in the same way that her kidney or liver would, and thus isn't a person, per se. And, in any case, it has no cognitive capacity to grasp the concept of life, and wouldn't be able to sense or feel anything and certainly not to grasp it to an extent of a complete child.
Debate Round No. 2
TruthSeeker87

Con

The point of viability, or the point at which a fetus can survive outside the mother, is 24 weeks. However, a fetus in the last week (40th week) has no legal rights as abortion is legal through all 9 months of pregnancy. Most states restrict it at the point of viability, but 9 states have no cut-off. Leroy Carhart, Curtis Boyd, and Warren Hern are just a few providers that perform abortions up until the due date.
There is no difference in a person and a human being. And again, scientifically speaking, a fetus from the point of conception or the point at which it begins to exist, IS a human being. Our humanity is not conditional on our size, level of development, environment, or degree of dependency. Therefore, abortion is the same as killing any other human being.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by ILikePie5 1 year ago
ILikePie5
I'm surprised that the dad has no say in this matter. After all, the baby does have half its DNA from its dad
Posted by godsend221 1 year ago
godsend221
I'm glad to see this debate. This is a debate that needs to be had in this country. Personally, I believe a life begins at conception and the only time I can rationally see having an abortion is in the case of non-consensual sex. When conception is made, the DNA of the child is not the same as the mother, therefore it is not "part of the mother's body". The organism then begins to develop and therefore is alive. Since it is alive, it must be treated with the same rights as a human life because that is what it is.
Posted by pngduck 1 year ago
pngduck
Comparing a fetus to part of a liver is illogical. You assert that they have the same potential for life which is completely untrue. A fetus, even a fertilized egg, possesses a complete genome which is unique to that individual. That genome is a composition of maternal and paternal traits. Although hepatocytes (liver cells) have the ability to regenerate (grow and multiply to replace lost liver) they do not have the potential to developed into a person.
Posted by colester112 1 year ago
colester112
Hey I will accept this debate if you edit the rules a bit. Like maybe do only 3 rounds or maybe even 1 and lower the time for judging to like a week maybe even a day. If you do this I will accept!
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.