Debate Rounds (5)
My opponent has been direct and to the point, so let me be.
A) A fetus is not a human being
A fetus, , first or second trimester, is not yet conscious. Not being conscious, it is not a human being who has emotions and makes rational decisions. It does not have life except insofar as bacteria, trees, or grass are alive. Why don't we have concerns about chopping down trees? What about those ants you stepped on on your way to work?
Also, A fetus does not have the brain parts, in lay terms, developed enough for conscious thought until late in the third trimester, near to it's birth. Many scientists actually believe that fetuses are not conscious until birth (1).
B) Unsafe Abortions
Legal or not, abortions happen. The difference is that when they are illegal they are in backalleys with coat hangers. The dangers of infection and of damaging a woman's body are fairly obvious. Currently, in the developing world and especially places where abortion is illegal, there are 69,000 deaths per year from unsafe abortions.
C) Unnecessary Hardship
There's a reason women request abortions. In some cases they are raped, and they understandably don't want to raise a child from such a situation. The mother's life may also be in danger. You know, the living, breathing human whose body pro - lifers are trying to control.
The parent must also raise the child, once it is born and IS conscious. They may not have the economic means to do this and this also causes unnecessary hardship.
D) Not your body
I know, civil rights. They always get in the way of the whole theocracy thing... But having been born with our bodies, it would seem like we had the right to them. A fetus is still connected to, and part of, a woman's body, therefore it's her body we are talking about, her property. And frankly, she is allowed to do what she wants with her body, as her property. If this is overturned, then that body is property of the state, which A makes no legal sense and B is reminiscent of a police state.
In summary, the fetus is not conscious, therefore does not have emotions and is not "human" in the traditional sense. Endangering women's lives, creating more unwanted children in the world, and taking control of human bodies seem somewhat drastic measures to protect a group of multiplying cells. Therefore I urge readers to vote against.
Banning abortion would indeed mean that there would be more people in the world. Overpopulation is a major problem and 842 million people (1) are undernourished every year. More people only causes more problems.
"also you shouldn't ban it but not if you have been raped.also if you don't want a baby keep you legs shut"
Why does my opponent suddenly allow abortion in cases of rape? If you're killing a child, shouldn't the child's life be paramount? The second comment makes no sense. Many people accidentally become pregnant every year, what is wrong with them having abortions? They aren't killing a human being, defined as is "distinguished by a more highly developed brain and a resultant capacity for articulate speech and abstract reasoning" (2) in the Encyclopedia Brittanica.
In short, my opponent has neither refuted my points nor introduced any thorough arguments of his/her own. Please vote for con.
I therefore await the time when my opponent will have the opportunity to do the above.
xxxxShannonxxxx forfeited this round.
xxxxShannonxxxx forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Con for the forfeits by Pro. Pro never presented anything close to a solid argument. Nor did Pro ever refute any arguments that Con presented. While con did misuse some sources (using weasel words to claim that "many scientists" when the source only presented a single scientist) most of their sources were fine and they actually used them.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.