The Instigator
lokure
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
pi3.14
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Abortions: yes or no?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/2/2018 Category: Society
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 347 times Debate No: 107432
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

lokure

Pro

I'm here to argue for why I am pro-choice. I'll state my arguments in round 2 and try and refute yours in round 3.
pi3.14

Con

I am here to argue for why I am pro-life. I'll give you the details in round two.
Debate Round No. 1
lokure

Pro

Thanks for accepting the debate.
The main reason I support abortions is because we, as humans love having a choice and hate having to have anything be limited. I feel that if we at least give them a choice, better choices will be made. Giving women the choice over what happens in their own body empowers them and take responsibility. Of course, the woman's surroundings and situation will affect her choice but I also feel that if one chooses to have sex, they are signing a contract that their act might produce a baby. If kid or any woman gets raped, I think that abortion should be an option but I think that if you give consent, then you should take responsibility in your actions.
I bet you've heard the phrase "Abortion kills babies." I think the problem with this statement is what one considers alive. Is it when you hear that you're pregnant or when the baby is out of the womb? Many people such as I think that one is considered a person when the fetus is viable (viable meaning that it is capable of working successfully).
Another reason is that legally allowing abortions will lower the risk of illegal abortions that could result in many physical and mental health problems. My last reason is that abortions can seem reasonable. Studies have shown that the fetus doesn't feel any pain so the parent won't have to think that they put their "kid" through pain when they aborted them.
Here are some articles where I found some information.

https://abortion.procon.org...

https://www.listland.com...

I look forward to your argument.
pi3.14

Con

In this argument, I will be using a lot of quotes from my sources because they phrase their arguments better than I could and go into a lot of detail. If you have extra time, I highly recommend that you read them. Anyway, below is my argument.

"The main reason I support abortions is because we, as humans love having a choice and hate having to have anything be limited." (You, round 2) Yes, I do agree that we do have the right to make our own choices, until they infringe upon other people's rights. (I know the comparisons in this debate are ridiculous, but they are here to help me get my point across.) A rapist could say, "It's my body, and I get to choose what I want to do with it." Sometimes, your freedom to choose should be restricted if it infringes upon the rights of others, as I said before.

"Giving women the choice over what happens in their own body empowers them and take responsibility." Just to be clear, the baby is not part of the mother; it is a unique human being and has its very own set of genetic code. The baby also has the potential to grow, reproduce (in later years), and has the potential to do all other things that older people do. There is a bunch of scientific evidence that life begins at conception.

"If any woman gets raped, I think that abortion should be an option." (You, round 2) If a woman gets raped and gets pregnant, do you think it is fair to punish the innocent child or the rapist? If somebody robbed a bank, would you throw their son/daughter in jail? Shouldn't you instead go after the rapist? I would also argue that killing an innocent human being is worse than raping somebody.

"I bet you've heard the phrase 'abortion kills babies.' I think the problem with this statement is what one considers alive... Many people such as I think that one is considered a person when the fetus is viable (viable meaning that it is capable of working successfully." (You, round 2) Say at 7 months a baby can live outside the mother's womb (I made that number up to show my point better) with the help of technology. According to you, the baby is therefore "a person." If war breaks out and all the technology that helps babies live is broken or destroyed, is a baby at 7 months no longer "a person"? Can you take away its personhood by destroying technology? In 2,000 years, is a baby that was just conceived "a person" if technology can continue its life outside the mother's womb, but today's babies aren't granted personhood until much later in life? Isn't that unfair? "In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court defined viability - and therefore personhood - as the point when the unborn is 'potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid.' ... Furthermore, viability depends not only on he child but on the ability of out technology to save his life. What will happen when we are able to save lives at fifteen weeks or less? Will those children suddenly become human and worthy to live? Can we honestly believe that two decades ago children at twenty-one weeks were not people, but are people now simply because of improved technology?" (Source 1, Part 3) I found this source to give very good arguments for why we should be pro-life. (Please do read it (the link brings you to a website that has about 12 articles that you can click on bringing you to a slightly different part of the website, if you know what I mean.)

"Another reason is that legally allowing abortions will lower the risk of illegal abortions that could result in many physical and mental health problems." (You, round 2) Well, let's look at the numbers, shall we? "Former abortion-rights activist Bernard Nathanson admits that he and his cofounders of NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) fabricated the figure that a million women were getting illegal abortions in America each year before Roe v. Wade. The average, he says, was actually one-tenth that number, about ninety-eight thousand per year. Nonetheless, the media eagerly disseminated the false information... Nathanson also says that he and his associates likewise invented the 'nice, round shocking figure' of five thousand to ten thousand deaths a year from illegal abortions. Research confirms that in 1966, before the first state legalized abortion, a total of 120 mothers died from abortion. The actual number of abortion deaths of women in the twenty-five years prior to 1973 averaged 250 a year, with a high of 388 in 1948. By 1972 abortion was still illegal in 80 percent of the country, but the use of antibiotics had greatly reduced the risk. Hence, the number dropped to thirty-nine maternal deaths from abortion that year. However, suppose that only one out of five deaths from illegal abortion was properly identified. This would still mean that the number of women dying the year before abortion was legalized would be fewer than two hundred, only 2-4 percent of the five thousand to ten thousand per year claimed by pro-choice advocates. This was not mere exaggeration. It was fabrication... We do not try to make kidnapping or child abuse safe and legal. If abortion kills children, our goal should not be to make it as safe and legal as possible, but to provide alternatives and legal restrictions that help avoid it in the first place." (Source 1, Part 7) Also, so what if the child has mental/physical health problems? Should you go out and kill anyone who has a physical/mental health problem? Even though they have one, they still deserve to live. The mother may not want the baby if it has a mental/physical health problem,but others do. "Nearly 1.3 million American families want to adopt... Not just 'normal' babies are wanted; many people request special-needs babies, including those with Down syndrome and spina bifida... Even if no one wanted to adopt a baby, it would still not be right to kill her. The point is simply that if someone doesn't want a baby, there are others who do." (Source 1, Part 6)

"Studies have shown that the fetus doesn't feel any pain so the parent won't have to thin that they put their 'kid' through pain when they aborted them." (You, Round 2) So? What is your point? Just because they don't feel pain (if your claim is right) doesn't justify their murder. If I poisoned someone, but knew they would die in their sleep and without pain, that doesn't mean that the murder was okay. Also, many people do argue that the fetuses in fact feel pain. "Many pro-life doctors maintain that fetuses can feel pain by 8 weeks after fertilization (about the time most surgical abortions take place). Pro-abortion doctors tend to argue that fetuses don't experience pain until the very end of pregnancy. Whose testimony is more reliable, those who have a financial interest in the availability of abortion or those who don't?" (Source 2, Article "Do Unborn Children Feel Pain?")

I know this was a long argument (In fact, I used 7,746 of the 10,000 possible characters!), but please don't skip over any of it because I feel like it gives a lot of relevant details. Anyway, it is your turn to refute my argument in round 3!

(Source 1) This is a great read in my opinion and it has many great pro-life arguments. It has 12 different articles detailing different things pro-choice people argue and has a counter to each one. (Sometimes this source references my second source.) Here it is:
https://www.lifesitenews.com...
(Source 2) This is also a great website with many links and goes into even more detail than the other website. It refutes many more arguments that pro-choice people make and has lots of evidence to back up its claims. Here is the site: http://www.abort73.com...
Debate Round No. 2
lokure

Pro

Thanks for replying so quickly.

"Yes, I do agree that we do have the right to make our own choices, until they infringe upon other people's rights...A rapist could say, "It's my body, and I get to choose what I want to do with it."
I get the message you're trying to relay but also don't think that the analogy is relatable. What a rapist does is rape another person's body and affecting another person's life negatively. Yes, they can do whatever they wish to their own body but a rape has its affects on another. I don't see how abortions infringe on other people's rights; they're not getting the abortion and it's the woman's choice alone so it shouldn't affect the person.

" Just to be clear, the baby is not part of the mother; it is a unique human being and has its very own set of genetic code. The baby also has the potential to grow, reproduce (in later years), and has the potential to do all other things that older people do."
I honestly just think that the choice for abortion should be legally available for a woman who has been raped. Unlike births that are planned, the person may not be in the ideal situation to support a child. Yes, the child could grow and amount to incredible heights but others who support abortions say that if the mother could not support a child at the time, then an abortion should be an option.
"If a woman gets raped and gets pregnant, do you think it is fair punish the innocent child or the rapist?"
I get your point but in this unique situation, the woman may feel pressured and feel not ready to give birth and support another human if she can barely support herself. I agree, killing an innocent is horrible but giving birth when you're not ready could endanger the child.
***I don't know how to respond to the other arguments***

Good luck in the voting period.
pi3.14

Con

"What a rapist does is rape another person's body and affecting aother person's life negatively. Yes, they can do whatever they wish to their own body but a rape has its affects on another. I don't see how abortions infringe on other people's rights; they're not getting the abortion and it's the woman's choice alone so it shouldn't affect the person." Being pro-life, I believe that the unborn baby is living and that abortion infringes on its right to live. I argue that the right to life is infringed upon when the mother gets an abortion. (Sorry that this is pretty much just re-iterating the same thing.)

"I honestly just think that the choice for abortion should be legally available for a woman who has been raped. Unlike births that are planned, the person may not be in the ideal dituation to support a child. Yes, the child could grow and amount to incredible heights but others who support abortion say that if the mother could not support a child at the time, then an abortion should be an option." First off, if pregnancies rarely are the result of rape, though they do happpen on occasion. Second, if the mother can't support the child on her own, she could still give it up for adoption. Thirdly, if that was an option after birth, everyone would (hopefully) agree that it is wrong. For example, if a single mother loses her job and can no longer financially support her kids, she can't just kill them. The same should apply to unborn babies. Also, there are many, many instances where the mother does end up aborting the child after being raped, but this doesn't help her. Sometimes the mother in later years will say that she got over the rape a few years after it happened but still hasn't gotten over the abortion they had, even decades later and still feel regret about it every day. Here is a website that gathers stories of abortion and the impacts on the people in later years of life (there is a list with brief descriptions, and if you click on their name, it gives a much more detailed story). You can even select different boxes to only include stories about babies that were aborted after rape or some other options.
http://www.priestsforlife.org...
Here is a specific story that I found:
http://www.priestsforlife.org...

"I agree, killing an innocent is horrible but giving birth when you're not ready could endanger the child." I would call imminent death endangering the child. Also, again, you could give the child up for adoption.

"***I don't kniw how to respond to the other arguments***" Thank you for your honesty.

"Good luck in the voting period." Thanks, and I wish the same to you. May the best argument win!
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.