The Instigator
creationist
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Grape
Pro (for)
Winning
37 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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/24/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 700 times Debate No: 16115
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (6)

 

creationist

Con

This debate is only open to grape, as our last debate on this subject was cut short.

the first round is only for my opponent's acceptance; it will not start the debate.
Grape

Pro

I accept the challenge. Good luck with your argument Con.
Debate Round No. 1
creationist

Con

I believe that abortion is morally wrong.

Morally: based on a sense of right and wrong according to conscience: moral courage ; moral law

Wrong: not in accordance with what is morally right or good: a wrongdeed.


Debate Me.
Grape

Pro

I'm still waiting for Con to make an argument for why abortion is morally wrong. Activities are not assumed to be morally wrong, so the burden of proof is not on me. I don't contest either of the definitions.
Debate Round No. 2
creationist

Con


I meant for grape to defend his point of view in round 2 but i guess that’s not how it worked out.

Ok now that we have wasted 2 of the 4 rounds, let’s get going.

abortion should be illegal based on the principal of value.

Killing a human that is still developing is the same as killing a fully developed human.

Look at it this way; which is more valuable, an adult, or an infant? Now you might say the adult because he/she is smarter, stronger and more capable than the newborn. You might say the newborn because he/she has the potential to become an adult. But, the adult was once a newborn, and the newborn will become an adult. Therefore, because the newborn will grow into an adult, and the adult was once a newborn, they are equally valuable


If they are equally valuable then should it be legal to kill one and illegal to kill the other?




Grape

Pro


Introduction:



Con’s case is rather unstructured so I am going to just make a few points of my own that address his case and build mine and then we can precede from there. Con has not offered much and I am a bit tried for time due to my AP exams so I will keep my arguments brief and to the point.



CA1: Argument from Potentiality



Con believes that because a fetus will become an adult, it is the same as an adult in value. However, that is not in line with how we determine value for nearly everything else. A pile of building materials is worth less than a house and an uncut stone is worth less than a gem. Similarly, we do not grant rights based on what rights someone will later have. A child will someday have the right to vote, but a child does not have the right to vote until maturity. That means that if a fetus will someday have the right to life, we need not grant it the right to life as a fetus by default. It is necessary to actually assess the rights of the fetus.



C1: Fetus is not a Person



Philosopher Mary Anne Warren proposes five criteria by which we may determine if something is a person: it is conscious, reasoning, or has self-motivated activity, self-concepts, or the capacity to communicate them. She does not require that a being exhibit all of these traits or exhibit them all the time [1]. However, a fetus does not even have one of these traits. The fact that it merely has a human genetic code does not provide us with a moral guideline to distinguish it from other unthinking living beings like plants. There is no reason to give a fetus higher moral standing than a tree or other similar organism.



C2: Self-Ownership



Even if the fetus is a person, the rights of the mother must be considered. Hans-Hermann Hoppe makes the following argument for self-ownership [2]: A person is necessarily the sole owner of her own body; no one can exert a claim over it because no one else is its user or occupier. Only a system of ownership based on who is the first occupier and actual user of a scarce resource (in this case a body) can rightfully exert authority over it. As the owner of her body, a mother has the sole right to exercise authority over it. That means she can consume food into it, inject harmful chemicals into it, kill it, and expel unwanted organisms from it. The fetus cannot make a positive rights claim to her body without violating her inalienable ownership of herself.



Sources:



[1] http://instruct.westvalley.edu...


[2] http://mises.org...



Debate Round No. 3
creationist

Con

creationist forfeited this round.
Grape

Pro

Extend my arguments.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Grape 5 years ago
Grape
Thanks for voting, you guys.
Posted by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
"This debate is only open to grape, as our last debate on this subject was cut short."

Ironic.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
creationistGrapeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
creationistGrapeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Creationist re-creates a debate with Grape since their last one was cut short and yet still forfeits. As Cliff states, it is quite ironic...
Vote Placed by BennyW 5 years ago
BennyW
creationistGrapeTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Why do so many pro-lifers here have such bad arguments?
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
creationistGrapeTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro refuted Con's case quite easily, and Con did not even show up for the last round to challenge those refutations.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
creationistGrapeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: This could not be more one sided that a fight between zombies of the Night of the Living Dead vs 28 Days Later. No OP, extremely weak value argument and then full retreat.
Vote Placed by socialpinko 5 years ago
socialpinko
creationistGrapeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: Conduct for forfeit. Arguments because the instigator brought one argument, that a fetus was the same as a person because it would one day become a human, however Pro easily refuted this with the example of a pile of building materials not being worth the same as a fully built house. The self ownership argument was really just overkill. Sources because Pro brought a few credible sources while Con brought none. S/G goes to Pro because Con made several spelling and grammatical errors.