The Instigator
nkastner
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
CiRrK
Con (against)
Winning
23 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 4 votes the winner is...
CiRrK
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/1/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 879 times Debate No: 15017
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

nkastner

Pro


Abortion should be a woman's right, in many situations such as rape a pregancy may be a mistake. Having a child is a life changing decision and expensive/time consuming. We have too many children who are without parents and we shouldnt put more children in the world that we cant care for. If a women feels she needs to have an abortion its her personal choice.
CiRrK

Con

==AC==

1. Pregnancies as a mistake, e.g. rape.

--> First, legal framework. To effectively determine when an action legal or illegal, we must use a framework of "comparative analysis." This means that we weigh the determined harms vs the determined benefits being gained. Obviously this is in-light of Constitutional mandates an restrictions, since the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Thus, if the non-consented pregnancies argument does indeed make a statistical impact to outweigh any pro-life argument, you should vote for my opponent. But if not, vote for me.

--> Second, statistics and empirics. Rape only accounts for at 1% of abortions. abortiontv.com writes "the overwhelming majority of all abortions, (95%), are done as a means of birth control. Only 1% are performed because of rape or incest." They received this info from the U.S. Bureau of Statistics. This makes my opponents argument insignificant in terms of empirics to weigh in the round.

--> Third, analysis of why pregnancies rarely occur during rape, with statistics. "Of the 200,000 women who were forcibly raped, one-third were either too old or too young to get pregnant. That leaves 133,000 at risk for pregnancy. A woman is capable of being fertilized only 3 days (perhaps 5) out of a 30-day month. Multiply our figure of 133,000 by three tenths. Three days out of 30 is one out of ten, divide 133 by ten and we have 13,300 women remaining. If we use five days out of 30 it is one out of six. Divide one hundred and thirty three thousand by six and we have 22,166 remaining. One-fourth of all women in the United States of childbearing age have been sterilized, so the remaining three-fourths come out to 10,000 (or 15,000). Only half of assailants penetrate her body and/or deposit sperm in her vagina,1 so let's cut the remaining figures in half. This gives us numbers of 5,000 (or 7,500). Fifteen percent of men are sterile, that drops that figure to 4,250 (or 6,375). Fifteen percent of non-surgically sterilized women are naturally sterile. That reduces the number to 3,600 (or 5,400). Another fifteen percent are on the pill and/or already pregnant. That reduces the number to 3,070 (or 4,600). Now factor in the fact that it takes 5-10 months for the average couple to achieve a pregnancy. Use the smaller figure of 5 months to be conservative and divide the avove figures by 5. The number drops to 600 (or 920). In an average population, the miscarriage rate is about 15 percent. In this case we have incredible emotional trauma. Her body is upset. Even if she conceives, the miscarriage rate will be higher than in a more normal pregnancy. If 20 percent of raped women miscarry, the figure drops to 450 (or 740). Finally, factor in what is certainly one of the most important reasons why a rape victim rarely gets pregnant, and that's physical trauma. Every woman is aware that stress and emotional factors can alter her menstrual cycle. To get and stay pregnant a woman's body must produce a very sophisticated mix of hormones. Hormone production is controlled by a part of the brain that is easily influenced by emotions. There's no greater emotional trauma that can be experienced by a woman than an assault rape. This can radically upset her possibility of ovulation, fertilization, implantation and even nurturing of a pregnancy."

2. Cant care for kids

--> This does not justify killing said kids. It would be illogical now to say we can kill all parentless kids in the world as a way to solve a harm within society.

--> Adoption is a much better alternative. Adoption.com writes: "The 1995 National Survey of Family Growth found that 500,000 women were currently seeking to adopt a child. (Freundlich, 1998) Of the 500,000 women seeking to adopt, only 100,000 had actually applied to adopt a child. (National Center for Health Statistics, 1997) The 1995 National Survey of Family Growth found that 232,000 women were currently taken concrete steps towards adoptions, compared to 204,000 in 1988. (National Center for Health Statistics, 1999) According to the 1988 National Survey of Family Growth there are an estimated 3.3 adoption seekers for every actual adoption." This means thats there are a huge amount of familes looking to adopt kids. Therefore, if the state focuses on good adoption policies we would not have a significant amount of kids without parents.


==NC==

As states above in the legal framework analysis, the consitution is the supreme law of the land. This means that consitutionality is the main driving factor behind legality. Thus, the premise of the NC is that abortion violates the 5th and 14th Amendments and thus should be illegal, unless the mothers life is threatened which would be competition over saftey of rights.

1. Roe. v Wade. The Supreme Court case which struck down state bans on abortion was deicded on with an analysis of the right to privacy. The Justices maintained that under the panumbra of privacy, abortion is a privacy issue for the female who is pregnant. But, in the majority decision, the court also held that if biological life was proven, then the right to life would outweigh the right to privacy. This is true because the right to life is a "mother" right, the most basic of the negative rights. Meaning the right to life is a prerequisite for acting out and pursuing all other rights we have. E.g. we cannot own property if we dont have life.

2. At this time, due to technological, biological advances since the time of Roe. v. Wade, we can safely say an embryo, fetus, or almost born baby is a biological human being with life.

Beckwith, Professor of bio-ethics and phiosophy writes: "For both ovum and sperm, which are genetically each a part of its owner (mother and father, respectively), cease to exist at the moment of conception. There is no doubt that the zygote is biologically alive. It fulfills the four criteria needed to establish biological life: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction. (There is cell reproduction and twinning, a form of asexual reproduction, which can occur after conception. For more on twinning, see below.) But is this life fully human? It is. First, the human conceptus -- that which results from conception and begins as a zygote -- is the sexual product of human parents. Hence, insofar as having human causes, the conceptus is human. Second, not only is the conceptus human insofar as being caused by humans, it is a unique human individual, just as each of us is. Resulting from the union of the female ovum (which contains 23 chromosomes) and the male sperm (which contains 23 chromosomes), the conceptus is a new -- although tiny -- individual. It has its own unique genetic code (with forty-six chromosomes), which is neither the mother's nor the father's."



Debate Round No. 1
nkastner

Pro

Despite all of the above that you state an abortion should legally be a womans right, why should you determine what a woman gets to do with her body. Its her ultimate decision and how does her decision to get an abortion affect you in anyway? Even if only 1% of abortions result from rape, that dosent mean the other reasons women have abortions are wrong. In response to having the child adopted; havent you ever thought about the fact that many children dont end up being adopted into loving homes,and thus suffer in orphanages or in other ways. Its not right to just assume a child is going to get adopted; if the child is not adopted into a good home you just entered another child into the world who may have an unstable life. A womens right to an abortion should be her own right; weather a women has an abortion has no effect on you as a person. It is simply your ignorancy which has developed your opinon.
CiRrK

Con

==AC==

1. "Despite all of the above that you state an abortion should be legally be a womans right"

--> No warrant provided why this would be the case

--> Extend the legal analysis I made, it is the framework for the round so any argumt that doesn't fit into this framework is irrelevant in the round

--> Implied concession of all the NC. This means (1) biological life = protection of life and (2) an embyo, fetus, etc are all biological forms of human life and (3) by the Constitution abortion should be made illegal

2. Her body, her choice

--> She already imlicitly conceded the legal framework so by extension the government can regulate her body if it infries on the right to life of the fetus.

3. How does it affect you?

--> I am a member of society, and hopefully I will be a father someday.

--> I am a rational and moral agent with the ability to deduce X debated actions

4. Even if the rape statitic is true, other reasons can be justified

--> No other options given

--> Extend evidence which states the vast majority of abortions are for social reasons and dont have any other major implicated justification

--> Cross-apply arguments from the NC. Life outweighs, abotion = violation of the right to life

5. Adoption is bad

--> She clearly didnt read the evidence I presented. The evidence indicates that there are huge lists of couples waiting to adopt, but they arent being utilized by pregnant women. Since it is possible that the adoption alternatiuve is one that can b used, but isnt being utlizied, doesnt justify abortion.

--> Extend argument that it is illogical to say that we can kill said kids afterwards to make their lives better

--> The argument that they might be in bad homes is fualty for two reasons: (1) it can eaily be solved by CPS, and (2) before adoptions parents musbe screened throughly by a sociologist.

6. It is "ignorancy" which has made your opinion

--> I have throughly researched the issue of abortion and came to the opinion that through legal precedent and understanding, abortion should be made illegal in cases bsides threatening the life of the mother.

--> This is an ad hominem attack, quite rude if I do say so myself

--> Please learn to use correct English when trying to prove my "ignorance" not "ignorancy"


==NC==

She has conceded the Roe v. Wade Analysis and the Beckwith evidence. At this point it is impossible for her to win any major offense epseicaly inlight of the conceded legal framework (comparative analysis and consitutionality).





Debate Round No. 2
nkastner

Pro


You being a father one day has nothing to do with my right or any other womans right as a woman, and as you state CPS will solve the issue..how do you know CPS is capable? I my self have had experience with CPS and i can state that they dont always fix everything properly, for they have so much to deal with. Have you ever thought about how adoption might affect a childs life...it could hurt them greatly if they learn that they are adopted because their mother didnt want them or couldnt take care of them.
CiRrK

Con

==Extensions==

Extend all arguments from my last speech, I dont want to write them all again(I'm lazy)

==AC 3==

1. CPS Bad

--> She gives no warrants

--> No service is perfect, but that doesnt justify killing an innocent. What is needed is better CPS agents.

--> Extend the argument that parents need to be screened first

2. Adoption Bad

--> Again no warrants

--> Alternative: ripping that baby from a womb with medical instruments, burning that child while in the womb, using extreme suction to remove the baby, and in some cases stabbing the child in the back of the neck and ripping its brains apart.

--> If adoption is utilized like my advocacy is, problems can be mitigated

--> And I am adopted, so I can speak with some knowledge of the system. IT is rare that kids enter poor and unloving homes. Its be idiotic for a couple to go through the process and then disregard the child.


==Voting Issues==

1. Roe V. Wade Analysis => Beckwith Evidence (child is biologically living) => Protection from constitution => Right to life outweighs nebulus claim of body rights of my opponent

2. She has no offense since she conceded the comparative analysis framework, thus the only offense left is my case which was conceded.

Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by BangBang-Coconut 5 years ago
BangBang-Coconut
there is no way the Pro can win this round. they've offered no empirical evidence, no logical insight, and no reason beyond "it should be a woman's choice" (which Con beautifully refuted).

but what really got me was in the Pro's rebuttal when she said, <i>"It is simply your ignorancy which has developed your opinon. "</i>
Posted by BangBang-Coconut 5 years ago
BangBang-Coconut
Oh darn, you beat me to this one CiRrK XD
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by BangBang-Coconut 5 years ago
BangBang-Coconut
nkastnerCiRrKTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: I was a bit disapointed in Pro for this debate, she didn't do much in the way of proving anything. On the inverse, I feel that CiRrK explained his points fantastically, which Pro also failed. Over-all the Pro made many baseless claims that just bugged me with their lack of warrant.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
nkastnerCiRrKTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: No argument from Pro
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 5 years ago
BlackVoid
nkastnerCiRrKTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro could only use appeals to emotion, lacks warrants for many arguments, and dropped even more. Needs to space different ideas into paragaphs.
Vote Placed by Rinexe 5 years ago
Rinexe
nkastnerCiRrKTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did an amazing job refuting each of Pro's cases, and Pro did very little to refute Con's cases. Not only that, but Pro did cite sources, but Pro did very little in that sense.