The Instigator
Pro (for)
6 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

I am pro-life.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/9/2017 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 482 times Debate No: 105694
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)




I am pro life. My opponent is pro-choice.

Life is important. Having an abortion simply for your benefit is wrong.

My opponent may begin.


I don't think it's fair to the child to not have an abortion.

If you're gonna have an abortion, this means that you're not ready nor willing to raise a kid.

Kids who grow up in broken households tend to be problematic in society.

People who are problematic in society tends to suffer more as they are viewed as a problem by society and are as such going be treated as one through social rejection, etc.

You're arguing that life is important and for that reason one should not have an abortion.Well, if a child is to be raised under circumstances in which the parents would've taken an abortion, the child will more likely to grow up being more of a negative utility in society since their parents aren't responsible people to begin with.How is a negative utility important?I don't know.
It's bad for us as a society to have him and it's bad for him as an individual to exist since his parents would've aborted him anyways and with that, wouldn't be able to fully necessitate his needs as a child leading to a potential problem in society.

Why accept so much problem to raise a bastard child that will be your future bank robber or thief when you can just conceive a child when you're ready to have children and have a well off kid instead.
Debate Round No. 1


From what I've understood, your first argument is that children shouldn't born if they are going to be born into a bad society and have bad upbringing. Now what gives anybody the right to decide that child's future? By your logic should babies with down syndrome (determined in the womb by pre-natal screening), be aborted by a family just because that family believes the child won't be beneficial to society?

There are people who grow up in loving families that turn out in the streets. The logic of that argument falls short here. You can't determine a child's future just by what you think might happen to it.

Life is too precious to waste on a person's lack of desire for it.

I've got more to say after you respond to this.


Well, unlike the baby with down syndrome, the baby in this case was gonna be aborted, no one chose to procreate for the baby, they procreated for the fun of it, that's how the topic of abortion came to be because that kid wasn't intentionally conceived.Also, when you say what gives anybody the rights to decide the child's future, then might as well not procreate to have children because you don't have a right to the baby's future so you should stay away from it.

Yes, there are people who grow up in loving families that end up in the streets but the rate of bad kids from dysfunctional parents are more than that.

If life is too precious to waste on a person's lack of desire for it, we might as well all just procreate and have 30 kids.Teens that don't wanna have kids, screw it, have them procreate and have children even though they or their parents will not desire it.
Debate Round No. 2


You have the right to create a child. You don't have the right to take it's life away.

Sex is for making babies. That's simply the science of it. The purpose of sex is to procreate, and if you are irresponsible and have sex you know the consequences.

Stating that the rate of bad kids from dysfunctional parents is more than those from loving families makes no difference to the argument. My argument was that you can't simply speculate on what a child's life may be like, and take it's life away if it looks bad. There have been many successful people that came from dysfunctional families.

I don't really understand your last sentence. Teens that don't wanna have kids, screw it, have them procreate and have children even though they or their parents will not desire it. If you are completely against having children then don't have sex. And instead of wasting money trying to make abortion safer, why not increase the effectiveness of contraceptives? Then women won't have the problem of having to kill a baby that's already been conceived.

I have a question. Do you believe that the fetus in the womb is living? If not, at what point does it become a human being with equal rights as others?


Well, the child's life is dependant on you because you chose to procreate and now choose to undo it.

No, sex makes babies, we have sex because its fun.

Well, is it more likely that your future kid will be extraordinary to the point where they will be able to withstand social conditioning or your child is just a normal child who will suffer due to a dysfunctional family?I'd say that your child will more likely be a normal person.Here is a wikipedia link to effects of a dysfunctional society on children->

Besides, parenting is a hard thing to do and is a form of labour, if a couple keeps a child that they don't want to have than it would be bad for the couple as it would make their life unnecessarily harder since they never chose to keep the kid.The child gets harmed too due to the reasons stated in the paragraph above this one.

Well, to understand what I said in the sentence " Teens that don't wanna have kids, screw it, have them procreate and have children even though they or their parents will not desire it. ", read the sentence that came before that sentence in my last argument.

Well, I'd say to not have sex unless you wanna marry and have kids.If people are dumb enough to be libertarians(aka in support of sex before marriage) but not be as responsible as libertarians(aka in support of sex before marriage), they don't deserve to spread their genes until they become smarter.

I can't answer that question, not important.
Debate Round No. 3


An infant is entirely dependent on you. You procreated it. Can you undo it? No. Because it is a living human being.

Again, sex is for making babies.

You seem to dismiss the strong debatable argument of whether or not a fetus is a baby in favor of the "The child will grow up unwanted, and become an obstacle for society" argument. Let me tell you this. Every child is born into a different environment. We can't aim to weed out those that grow up in toxic environments simply because they may end up heading down the wrong road. We can't take away a child's chance to life outside the womb because their environment may inflict pain and suffering on them. Otherwise, we should just kill every single child to be born into a poor region of the world, "knowing" that they would grow up in a bad environment and have no positive effect on the world. Thankfully we know this isn't the case.

The life argument: Adult, teen, child, infant, fetus, embryo, zygote. Each one of these is a stage of human development. As such, shouldn't each one of these have equal rights, regardless of their stage of development?

The standard medical text Human Embryology and Teratology states, “Although human life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.”

Peter Singer, a pro-choice philosopher, said, "there is no doubt that from the first moments of its existence an embryo conceived from human sperm and eggs is a human being."

In his book, A Defense of Abortion, David Boonin writes, "[T]he most straightforward relation between you and me on the one hand and every human fetus on the other is this: All are living members of the same species, homo sapiens. A human fetus after all is simply a human being at a very early stage in his or her development."

Philosophers and scientists alike agree: A human is a human even at its earliest stages of development. Life begins at conception.

If you still consider your argument about human life being dependent on whether it will be successful or wanted as your strongest argument, I ask you to consider this question. Is the life of another the price you want to pay for a happy life or a good society?

Thank you.


A living human being that is incapable of emotions and thoughts has no welfare.

Sex isn't for making babies, sex just is.

Instead of risking the child's welfare for some arbitrary moral reason, why not have a child when you are truly ready?That's far better.I can tell Ted Bundy to not rape but he would still rape, he can rape but its better for him not to rape anyone.Doesn't mean he won't stop raping.

I mean, you can always create another baby.Also, you're not paying attention to the parents who are living and capable of thought(has welfare unlike the fetus), they won't be happy raising a child they never wanted.

Also, pss: I will win this argument because this place is full of liberals and they will vote for abortion :)
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Throwback 7 months ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 7 months ago
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30