The Instigator
Rejuvinatedghost
Pro (for)
Winning
22 Points
The Contender
duiven
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

Abortion

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
Rejuvinatedghost
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/15/2017 Category: Health
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 509 times Debate No: 99943
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (4)
Votes (5)

 

Rejuvinatedghost

Pro

Abortion.
Many argue that it is immoral.That the unborn has a right to live. Many forget that the choice for the termination of a pregnancy shouldn't be according to a personal belief,but according to what the mother wants.A fetus is alive,it is.But a woman's right to her body is greater than an unborn cluster of cells.Sure,life matters,but animals live.Bacteria live.Fungal clusters live.Why should a cluster of cells leeching from a woman's nutrients have more right than the Mother herself.An unwanted baby is sure to have a traumatic and unfulfilled life. Adoption is not the answer as it has been proven to be unsuccessful.Child birth is incredibly painful and laborious,and an unwilling woman should not be force to go through it just because another persons belief dictate that she should be forced to do so.
Banning abortion is no help.Doing so will only give the demand for underground abortion clinics to arise.That will cause incredible health issues and danger to the woman's life.
Some argue that fetuses can feel pain during abortion.That is irrelevant as the fetus will die anyway.Animals feel pain when slaughtered,yet no one argues against that.A woman's right to her body and person outweighs an unwanted fetus taking nutrients from said body.
Having a child unprepared can end a woman's career,stump her social life, and create an incredibly damaging environment for the child to grow up in.
A religious reason is irrelevant as,shocker,not everyone believes in it. Women should not lose control over their bodies just because a majority decided so.Just because a book written thousands of years ago has some words in it does not mean that, in our fact driven modern world, it must be used as law.We take only facts.
Women who are denied abortions are more likely to become unemployed, to be on public welfare, to be below the poverty line, and to become victims of domestic violence.
A woman's risk of dying from having an abortion is 0.6 in 100,000, while the risk of dying from giving birth is around 14 times higher (8.8 in 100,000).
At the end,a women must have the choice over her own body.Many who argue that a fetus's life also matters tend to speak of women as if they don't have a choice.It is not the debater's,but the woman's word and choice that truly matters.
duiven

Con

Well ur gay so i dont hnk ur opinion in vallidid
Debate Round No. 1
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by duiven 1 year ago
duiven
c'mon guys do you have any sense of true debate skills at all? I am the master debater after all
Posted by CosmoJarvis 1 year ago
CosmoJarvis
Duiven is an exceptional debater. Far beyond my skill!
Posted by Rejuvinatedghost 1 year ago
Rejuvinatedghost
Love the opposition. Definitely will be a close contest.
Posted by Gregg_Hyde 1 year ago
Gregg_Hyde
The heck is that argument from Con. I would have preferred to debate this issue.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by JimShady 1 year ago
JimShady
RejuvinatedghostduivenTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't agree with Pro, but he gets points for conduct, grammar, and at least having arguments.
Vote Placed by Sui_Generis 1 year ago
Sui_Generis
RejuvinatedghostduivenTied
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 seems to be trolling.
Vote Placed by DNehlsen 1 year ago
DNehlsen
RejuvinatedghostduivenTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Neither debater presented sources, nor was there any real issue in conduct so I'll leave those both as neutral. I found use Pro to have better grammar and spelling in that user Con, in the few words he used, misspelled the majority of them. Con did, however, have the more convincing argument. By bringing to light a fact about Pro, which would damage his reputation, Con managed to invalidate everything Pro had said, because of who was saying it. Therefore, I found Con to have the more convincing argument.
Vote Placed by TheCritic89 1 year ago
TheCritic89
RejuvinatedghostduivenTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Shame on you, Con, for participating in a debate with much merit against an easily winnable argument for only one round. Pro's argument is terrible. Their grammar is....technically better. The arguments are.......very unfortunately, better. No sources were cited. Con obviously loses conduct. I didn't "agree" with con here. I agreed with the premise of being con to pro's argument.
Vote Placed by Amarandum 1 year ago
Amarandum
RejuvinatedghostduivenTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: duiven has the position nearer to my own, but ad hominem is a logical fallacy that shows the weakness of an argument. Pro's argument was unconvincing to say the least, but far more convincing than simply saying, "your gay". Come on.