The Instigator
ABoleman
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
asta
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

I"m Pro-choice, tell me why you aren"t

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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: 7/13/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,262 times Debate No: 116497
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (100)
Votes (0)

 

ABoleman

Pro

I"ve been seeing a lot of "pro-life" people on my facebook friends lately. They argue that abortion is murder and tend to post pictures that I would consider propaganda because they do not accurately portray what the fetus looks like in its stages. I can honestly probably list one hundred reasons why I am pro-choice, but I am
insterested to debate with someone who feels otherwise, as most people I debate with on this subject have no intention on an open dialogue. I can understand someone being against abortion in the sense that they would never choose one for themselves/partner, however I have a hard time understanding someone wanting to overturn Roe vs Wade and make abortion illegal, I struggle to understand how someone would want to take away a woman"s right to choose, & if you are for that: do you support a higher percentage of our taxes going towards welfare?
asta

Con

I'm pro life because science confirms that a fetus is a human being. Science says that a fetus, even a zygote has all the necessary chromosomes to be alive and they meet all the necessary criteria to be alive. This is why I want Roe v Wade overturned.

"do you support a higher percentage of our taxes going towards welfare?" No. If a woman does not want to take care of a child, she can set the kid up for adoption. I don't think the foster system uses tax dollars because they get the money by other ways.
Debate Round No. 1
ABoleman

Pro

Actually, scientists have not been able to agree on when a fetus is considered a human-being. Something having chromosomes is not equivalent to personhood. The arguments on when "life begins" varies greatly depending on who you"re speaking to: some argue that life starts at conception, some argue that even wasting sperm is equivalent to throwing away life, some argue that it is when the fetus develops a heartbeat, some argue it is when a fetus can feel pain, some argue that it is when the fetal brain activity exhibits regular wave patterns (25 weeks), etc. My point being, there is no final consensus on when a fetus is considered a person and therefore a fetus does not carry rights over the woman"s choice if she wants to carry the fetus to term.
You also may be surprised to learn that state and federal taxes contribute to over $4 billion dollars annually on the foster care system. There are currently over 400,000 children in and out of the foster care system. You are saying that if a woman doesn"t want to take care of a child she can just set it up for adoption, but in reality it"s not that simple. The first concern is that the US is one of the most expensive places in the world to give birth. It costs an estimated $10,000-15,000 for a childbirth with no complications. Secondly, some women who choose abortion are alcoholics, drug addicts, etc. You think they are going to discontinue their lifestyle in order to nurture a child they do not want? Some women have disorders and they would have to cease taking medication in order to carry a fetus to term. There are many reasons a woman will choose to have an abortion and it"s not the governments job to ban her from doing so. Most women who carry a fetus to term do not give their child up for adoption, even if that was initially the plan. There are many cases where women backed out of an adoption planned 6 months earlier immediately after giving birth. Therefore, adoption is not a reasonable alternative. The majority of women who have abortions are under or near the poverty line and are single mothers, if you don"t encourage paying higher taxes going towards welfare, are you really pro life or are you just pro birth?
Another thing I would like to point out on this subject is that over turning Roe vs Wade will not eliminate or likely substantially decrease abortion. The countries where abortion is outlawed have a higher rate of abortion than countries where it is legal. In overturning Roe vs Wade, illegal abortions will increase and place women at risk. There also is the issue on how to criminalize abortion and how to defer a miscarriage from an abortion. For example, there have been multiple women in El Salvador who are serving 15 years in prison over a miscarriage that was falsely deemed an abortion.
Evidence has shown that the answer to greatly reducing abortion rates is access to affordable birth control and adequate sex education, not banning it.
asta

Con

"Actually, scientists have not been able to agree on when a fetus is considered a human-being. Something having chromosomes is not equivalent to person hood." The claim that a fetus is a human being is not an opinion, but a fact and one that's backed up by scientific evidence. Person is a legal term. Unfortunately a fetus is not a person, but they should be because they are a scientific human.

"You also may be surprised to learn that state and federal taxes contribute to over $4 billion dollars annually on the foster care system" Can you cite this?

You said that a woman setting up a child for adoption is hard. How? With few exceptions if any, kids don't get messed up in the system. According to http://www.adopt.org..., it states that over 94% of kids who
get set up for adoption get adopted within 4 years. I imagine they all get adopted within 7 years. Not only that, but since adoption costs a lot of money, this may sound like a negative but in reality, it means that only rich people are adopting.

In conclusion, over 94% of kids who get set up for adoption get adopted and they get adopted to relatively well off families who want to adopt. How's adoption bad?

Any that don't get adopted in that one fiscal year carry over to the next year.

My theory on this is that the foster system gets their money from kids being adopted since it costs lots of money to adopt from the foster system.

"Some women have disorders and they would have to cease taking medication in order to carry a fetus to term. There are many reasons a woman will choose to have an abortion and it's not the governments job to ban her from doing so." They might be able to live their drug addict lifestyle anyway, but that's a digression. If they planned to set a kid up for adoption and they don't want to anymore, then why would they change their minds?

"Another thing I would like to point out on this subject is that over turning Roe vs Wade will not eliminate or likely substantially decrease abortion." Yes it will. When abortion became legal in 1973, the abortion rate skyrocketed. It then fell down due to contraception control, which I support and so do 80% of Republicans.

"The countries where abortion is outlawed have a higher rate of abortion than countries where it is legal." It's comparable and due to other factors, like Conception control.

In overturning Roe vs Wade, illegal abortions will increase and place women at risk. "There also is the issue on how to criminalize abortion and how to defer a miscarriage from an abortion." Women should get punished for abortions. Once abortion becomes classified as murder, then it should be treated like murder. Anyone who commits an abortion when it is illegal should get punished like a murderer.

"Evidence has shown that the answer to greatly reducing abortion rates is access to affordable birth control and adequate sex education, not banning it." I don't want to ban condoms or sex ed classes. I want abstinence to be encouraged but IUDs and condoms to be a last resort. Also, people should pay for their own conception control.
Debate Round No. 2
ABoleman

Pro

"The claim that a fetus is a human being is not an opinion, but a fact and one that's backed up by scientific evidence. Person is a legal term. Unfortunately a fetus is not a person, but they should be because they are a scientific human." Scientists agree that "life" begins at conception & this life is capable of becoming a person, but life is a broad definition. Which is why I said a human-being/person. Science is constantly evolving and scientists cannot collectively agree on when a fetus is a human-being. One argument is the "twinning argument", where up to two weeks after fertilization the zygote can split into multiple zygotes. If at conception a zygote is considered a human-being, it does not make sense that a human-being split themselves in half and create an entire new human-being with the same DNA. Here is a link to scientists opposing theories on when a fetus is considered human-being: http://science.jburroughs.org...

Here is the citation for foster care systems costing $4.3 billion dollars and over 600,000 kids in the system. For all these people who want to adopt so badly, where are they for these kids, who are actual sentient human-beings: http://www.adoptioncouncil.org...

You stated that 94% of children get adopted within 4 years. Yes, because only 4% of women choose adoption for their unwanted pregnancies. After a few years of forcing women to carry pregnancies to term supply will outweigh demand and there will be even more children in the foster care system. "With few exceptions, if any kids don"t get messed up in the system." What? There are thousands of horror stories about children who have suffered both physically and psychologically in the foster care system. Again, all these supposed people so desperate to adopt should focus firstly on the actual children in this world and not a fetus.

I never said adoption was bad, I said it is not a good alternative. Carrying a pregnancy to term even when you want the child take a toll on women physically and emotionally. Giving birth is a huge commitment & there are risks for complications. No body should be forced to do that if they don"t want to, because a fetus is not a person, whereas a woman is a person and should choose what she decides to do with her body.

"They might be able to live their drug addict lifestyle anyway, but that's a digression. If they planned to set a kid up for adoption and they don't want to anymore, then why would they change their minds?" How is that a digression? Again are you pro-life or pro-birth. Would you not argue that a fundamental aspect of pro-life would be wanting a child to be healthy or not risk dying in complications due to the mother using drugs and drinking throughout her pregnancy? You just said they might live their drug addicted lifestyle anyway, but it"s okay as long as they"re born. It"s preferable to birth a drug addicted baby that will suffer and feel pain than to abort a fetus when it is incapable of feeling pain. Women do sometimes change their mind about adoption, maybe after being forced to go through all that she would want something out of it. However, if we are taking away a woman"s right to choose perhaps we can also deem unfit mothers to have to give up their newborns as well.

There will be no way to measure exactly how many abortions are performed if they are being done illegally. In fact, you can literally have an abortion by taking a pill now, if successful there will be no way to know one has had an abortion but if it"s unsuccessful the woman will be placed at risk. Again, studies show that banning abortion does not stop abortion but increases dangerous abortions.

You are saying anyone who gets an abortion should be treated as a murderer? That"s honestly ridiculous to me as there are so many layers to a women"s choice to abort and a fetus is again not equivalent to an actual person. & as I argued before, it is not always detectable when someone has had an abortion versus when they miscarry. You are risking giving women a life sentence for miscarriage, I never thought I would see the day where we wanted to be our society to align with El Salvador.

You want abstinence to be encouraged but that"s unrealistic lol. People want to have sex and they are going to, especially when abstinence is encouraged. Birth control is not always effective. Many people who had abortions used some method of birth control. If my birth control fails me, I am 100% getting an abortion & no one is going to force me to have a child. That is my choice and my choice only & just because you think conception is a human-being is completely irrelevant to what I choose to do with my body. If you feel that way, don"t have an abortion.
asta

Con

Which is why I said a human-being/person. Science is constantly evolving and scientists cannot collectively agree on when a fetus is a human-being." It only evolves on some issues. Either a fetus is a human being or a fetus isn't. And the evidence like chromosomes and meeting the criteria for life are evidence that a fetus is a human being.

"If at conception a zygote is considered a human-being, it does not make sense that a human-being split themselves in half and create an entire new human-being with the same DNA." Why not. The cell asexually reproduced. It happens right now. My cells are doing it, so are yours, it"s just on a more significant scale for the zygote.

"Here is a link to scientists opposing theories on when a fetus is considered human-being: http://science.jburroughs.org...;

Some scientists are for and against abortion. But saying that pro choice scientists represent true science is just like saying an evangelical pastor represents true Christianity. Just because you have a title and believe that you truly represent something does not mean you do.
A true christian would live by the way they interpret the bible. This requires biblical evidence
A true pro science person would believe what science confirms. This requires scientific evidence.
Is there any pro choice scientific evidence? Your site said something about a fetus being conscious/feeling pain. A sleeping person feels less pain when killed then a conscious person does when being punched. Does this mean that it should only be a misdemeanor to kill a sleeping person if they can only barely feel pain? No. Pain isn't the only thing that makes an action bad.
"Here is the citation for foster care systems costing $4.3 billion dollars and over 600,000 kids in the system. For all these people who want to adopt so badly, where are they for these kids, who are actual sentient human-beings: http://www.adoptioncouncil.org...;
The foster system should get funded by other ways, but that"s a tangent. Those 600,000 kids will eventually get adopted. It"s like school. It takes time to move through the process.
"You stated that 94% of children get adopted within 4 years. Yes, because only 4% of women choose adoption for their unwanted pregnancies." I think these statistics are unrelated. And more then 4% of women set their unwanted pregnancies up for adoption. Currently, 43% of unwanted pregnencies end in abortion (http://shriverreport.org...). This is a left leaning site. Some people choose to parent their child, which is their choice. Assuming all unwanted people get set up for adoption, which is free(http://www.americanadoptions.com...), 57% of the kids form this will end up in foster systems, and that"s the current status quo. If abortion was illegal, and all would be aborted kids were set up for adoption, although the adoption rate rises, it only doubles. The adoption agency becomes twice as powerful. It would only cost only about $3.24 billion extra dollars, about $10 per US citizen in tax money. The adoption system ideally should get funded differently, but I only have so many characters and I digress a lot. I apologize for the digression.
"There are thousands of horror stories about children who have suffered both physically and psychologically in the foster care system." Can you site this? I know some foster kids myself and they aren"t messed up. CNN also claims they don"t get messed up(http://ireport.cnn.com...). The foster system may be messed up, that doesn"t mean the kids inside it are.

"Again, all these supposed people so desperate to adopt should focus firstly on the actual children in this world and not a fetus." What if the children are already fine?

"Carrying a pregnancy to term even when you want the child take a toll on women physically and emotionally." I don"t want them to make the woman feel bad. I want them to live. If the woman didn"t want the child, she could have not have had sex or if she did, she could use an IUD.

"because a fetus is not a person, whereas a woman is a person and should choose what she decides to do with her body." A fetus should be classified as a person because of bullet point #1.

"Would you not argue that a fundamental aspect of pro-life would be wanting a child to be healthy or not risk dying in complications due to the mother using drugs and drinking throughout her pregnancy?" When I said that, I meant they MIGHT be allowed to do that. If their drug addiction is weed, then fine. If it"s crack, then no.

"You just said they might live their drug addicted lifestyle anyway, but it"s okay as long as they"re born." No one is born a drug addict. My grandmother smokes but my Mom never was addicted to smoking. Just because a pregnant woman smokes does not mean the baby will get addicted.

"Women do sometimes change their mind about adoption, maybe after being forced to go through all that she would want something out of it." If she wants to parent the kid, then fine.

"However, if we are taking away a woman"s right to choose perhaps we can also deem unfit mothers to have to give up their newborns as well." Depends on your definition of unfit. My definition of an unfit parent is one who can"t afford to take care of the child without the government and/or is a child abuser.

"There will be no way to measure exactly how many abortions are performed if they are being done illegally." Websites already measure it.

Again, studies show that banning abortion does not stop abortion but increases dangerous abortions." Every abortion is dangerous since it kills a human life. This will sound harsh but when women had abortions when it was illegal, they kindof deserved to die because at that time, they murdered a baby. This is a tangent on the death penalty.

"You are saying anyone who gets an abortion should be treated as a murderer?" How is this ridiculous? It"s ideological consistency. It only applies to people who have an abortion once it"s illegal.

"there are so many layers to a woman's choice to abort and a fetus is again not equivalent to an actual person." There are also many pro life lawyers.

"It is not always detectable when someone has had an abortion versus when they miscarry." When illegal, the judicial system gets information that would be proof of a deliberate abortion and that would cause the woman to get punished, if there is enough proof.

"I never thought I would see the day where we wanted to be our society to align with El Salvador." This is just like me saying, "You want abortion to be legal! I never thought I would see the day where we wanted to be our society to align with North Korea and China". Whether or not other countries have abortion restrictions should not determine our laws. We should not be influenced by them. Yet, scientists who claim to be independent are pro choice often because the church is pro life. That"s not being independent. That"s depending on what the church had to say. If thee church was pro choice, science would probably be pro life.

"You want abstinence to be encouraged but that"s unrealistic lol." Why not? I do it until marriage. There should be a punishment for premarital sex like a $500 fine unless done with an IUD to deter dangerous sex.

"Birth control is not always effective." If abortion were illegal, people would make safer sex decisions. It"s not like countries where it is illegal have MASSIVE abortion rates. THeir rates are comparable to the west because of conception control differences and I support conception control.

"If my birth control fails me, I am 100% getting an abortion & no one is going to force me to have a child." Thanks for the motivation to convince you not to get an abortion.
Debate Round No. 3
ABoleman

Pro

Science works by developing theories that can later be discredited or proven wrong. One example is pluto no longer being considered a planet, despite previous conviction the definition of what is considered a planet changed . so while technically a zygote/ fetus is considered human "life", scientists can not agree on when it is considered a human-being, that same definition classifies bacteria as life.
pro-life or pro-choice scientists are equivalent as long as they provide evidence for their theories. Evangelical pastors do represent christianity. Just because they are not the majority does not mean they don"t carry representation. By using biblical evidence alone, the bible advocates for genocide, rape, murder, slavery, women being properties etc.
A sleeping person is: a human-being, alive outside of the womb, developed brain/organs, not dependent on someone else"s body to exist, etc. i never said a fetus not experiencing pain was the sole reason for an abortion being ethical.
The fact that it takes four years for an already small amount of children to be adopted and the fact that this figure is not 100%, 20,000 people annually age out of the foster care system without being adopted. If all of women were forced into carrying that fetus to term, that is an extra 3 million kids in the foster care system or on welfare within 5 years.. Here is just one example from the state of California https://boothkoskoff.com.... Social workers in the foster care system are understaffed, overworked and have a high turnover rate, meaning that they struggle with the time or resources to properly monitor foster homes. In less than 2 years: "276 cases of foster abuse in the state of California. However, an investigation by the Los Angeles Times uncovered that the state underreported foster abuse cases to meet the national standard of 0.32%..". That's good that your friends weren't messed up in the foster care system, unfortunately that is not everyone's reality. I know a pair of siblings that were aged out in the foster care system and changed group homes over 10 times and were constantly abused. I also knew someone who was a foster parent for the income, mentally abused the kids and pocketed most of the money for herself, barely taking care of them. Also: http://www.tampabay.com.... The opioid epidemic is a great example of what can happen when there are too many children in the system and not enough resources. "The instability that comes from being bounced from home to home causes emotional, psychological, and physical harm. We literally cannot take care of all of the children in the system today, so putting hundreds and thousands more in the system is only going to cause further issues.

Adoption is not an alternative for abortion because you still would be required to carry the pregnancy for 9 months & birth it. Some women get extremely sick, experience a lot of pain, struggle with mental disorders from the change in hormones (ie post partnum depression). Having a complicated or painful pregnancy can get in the way of a woman"s career or education. Mind you, the US has one of the worst maternity leave options for women of developed countries. Most of maternity leave is unpaid. Then you are either required to go through labor or have a major surgery to remove it. The United States has the highest maternal mortality rate of all of the first world developed countries. Why should someone be forced to risk their life over a fetus they do not want? I have a right to bodily autonomy therefore I have the right to choose if I want to put my body through that or take those risks,no one is required to give blood, or a kidney transplant even if that results in the death of the person needing one. Almost everyone agrees with the sentiment that abortion should be allowed in the case of incest or rape, or at the very least if the woman's life is at risk - which further proves that while a fetus is biologically human "life" it is not the same thing as an actual human-being.

"When I said that, I meant they MIGHT be allowed to do that. If their drug addiction is weed, then fine. If it"s crack, then no." Just so you know, you can't decide or control what people's addictions are.Should women who are addicts and admit won"t quit be banned from abortion? The rate of babies born addicted to drugs has quadrupled in the last two decades, some hospitals are opening up seperate wings specifically for these babies.
IUDs can cost over $1,000 without insurance, many women cannot afford this and unless the government wants to provide free IUD"s to everyone, this cannot be required or expected."When abortion is legal, data can be measured more accurately by health statistics and reports. when Abortion is illegal, they rely on other methods such as looking at " abortion-related" complications in hospitals and surveys. Some people have no complications, or would not admit they had one in the survey out of fear of persecution. So that estimated number could be much higher."
"Every abortion is dangerous since it kills a human life. This will"sound harsh but when when women had abortions when it was illegal, they kindof deserved to die because at that time, they murdered a baby. This is a tangent on the death penalty." Again, something being biologically life is not a person/baby."50% of pregnancies result in a miscarriage in the first trimester, should they be charged with manslaughter in the same way accidentally killing a person is charged? No, this is because a fetus is not equivalent. And I don"t understand the logic of being pro-life and supporting the death penalty, makes no sense but anyway,
I completely understand that there are pro-life layers, I respect your decision. That is why you don"t have to ever get an abortion, and I would fight for your right to make that choice.
The judicial system is incredibly flawed. A woman could be wrongfully convicted or tried as a criminal for a miscarriage.
Comparing us to El Salvador is not comparable to saying having legal abortions makes us like China and North Korea. El Salvador had abortions completely illegal and jails women for getting them, which is what you want. China and North Korea have forced abortions. Pro-choice is not pro-abortion, I don"t think anyone should be forced what to do with her body.
Science does not depend on what the church thinks. The fact that science contradicts the Bible is simply a matter of being educated & actually studying and questioning things before accepting them in blind faith. Your whole argument is based on a scientific term for "life" yet you are questioning scientists and saying their options rely on the church. Do you believe in science or do you not? You want to fine people $500 for having sex, how will that be monitored? How are they gonna pay for that? Lots of poor people have sex, but no worries let"s just throw them in jail when they don"t pay along with anyone who aborts, and put people with miscarriages on trial costing us a bunch of tax-payer dollars. Meanwhile, have to open more foster cares for all these children who"s parents are in jail/ don"t want them. This is the material made for a dystopian novel."
You could never convince me to be anti-choice bc I respect every person"s right to choose. A fetus is not equivalent to a person, until you pro-lifers decide to carry our unwanted fetuses in your own womb, I will decide what to do with my body.
asta

Con

The pro life ones provide evidence. The pro choice ones provide evidence that I hope I can refute.

If your argument is dependency, then a 4 year old child is dependant on their parents for survival. Moreover, people on welfare are dependant on productive people without their consent. Does this justify a painless death sentence for them? No. They should get a job, but I digress.

You know how I said most kids leave the system within 4 years? What if they arrived when they were 15? If they did this, then they possibly didn"t have enough time to get adopted. Also, your cite does not tate 20,000 age out of the system.

"https://boothkoskoff.com....... " In less than 2 years: "276 cases of foster abuse in the state of California. However, an investigation by the Los Angeles Times uncovered that the state underreported foster abuse cases to meet the national standard of 0.32%..". 276/60,000 means that the abuse rate is around 4 per 1000. Although I empathize with virtually all victims of abuse, this is not super common. http://www.who.int... states that 1/13 people report being abused as a child. This is about 77 per 1000. You are disproportionately LESS likely to be abused as a foster kid then you are as a conventional kid.

Although I empathize with the abused, the rate is very rare and examples do not represent the mainstream. I imagine adoption agencies make themselves look bad so people sympathize with them and are more likely to adopt and treat the child well. I did not see the word "Opioid" in the article once so I don"t think the article talks about it.

People recover from pain and pain is often short term. Just as slaves got separated from their families when sold, although it was bad, their emotions recovered and they lived with it. Similarly, foster kids naturally toughen up and this helps them in the future since they now have a metaphorical tough skin.

"you still would be required to carry the pregnancy for 9 months & birth it." It"s why people discourage recreational sex. Consequences like that come from premarital sex which is why it is discouraged and should be prohibited.

While it is bad women have to endure this, it is merely a lesser evil compared to innocent life being taken. Women could continue high school, college, or their job, if they set the kid up for adoption.

"Why should someone be forced to risk their life" It"s a "risk". You have a higher chance of dying from living in some cities then you do from pregnancy.

"I have a right to bodily autonomy therefore I have the right to choose if I want to put my body through that or take those risks,no one is required to give blood, or a kidney transplant even if that results in the death of the person needing one." One relevant difference is you did not voluntarily cause the event to happen (in most situations). If someone ran you over for drunk driving, and you need their kidney to save your life, they should be required to give a kidney, since they caused the event to happen from a mistake they made.

Although https://news.gallup.com... states that only 19% of the US population is pro life in all situations, it also states that:

-The 2 most pro life categories combined get 55% of the opinion vs 42% of the 2 leftist most opinions on the pro choice side.

-The site say that the pro lifers tend to be more moderate in their beliefs, whereas pro choicers tend to be more radical.

-It also states that many "pro choice" people only support abortion in the event of rape, to save the mother"s life, or incest, or if the fetus is messed up (RSIF). RSIF abortions make up less than 10% of abortions. People who who support this position in essence are 10% pro choice and 90% pro life, and this is close to the middle of the abortion spectrum.

"Should women who are addicts and admit won"t quit be banned from abortion? The rate of babies born addicted to drugs has quadrupled in the last two decades" I don"t think this is due to drugs. It might be due to how society has gotten more drug involved.

"IUDs can cost over $1,000 without insurance" They can get insurance or they can save the money themselves. Once they save the money, the feeling of sex would feel better since people feel better about things they work for instead of things just given to them.

It"s harder to get information, but they find a way to measure it.

"50% of pregnancies result in a miscarriage in the first trimester, should they be charged with manslaughter in the same way accidentally killing a person is charged?" I don"t believe in punishing genuinely accidental killings, since they"re genuine accidents. I don"t even think it"s a crime to accidentally shoot someone if it was a genuine accident. I also don"t believe this is at 50% unless there is a cite.

"And I don"t understand the logic of being pro-life and supporting the death penalty" Because the baby is innocent and a murderer is not. I could say why are people against the death penalty for being a murderer, yet they support the death penalty just for not being wanted? Even if you don"t believe that a fetus is a person, you would want them to be alive if they were wanted. So you are essentially giving the fetus the death sentence for not being wanted by the mother.

"The judicial system is incredibly flawed. A woman could be wrongfully convicted or tried as a criminal for a miscarriage." The burden of proof is on the prosecution.

"El Salvador had abortions completely illegal and jails women for getting them, which is what you want." I advocate for something more extreme than jail because of ideological consistency. If only comes into effect once abortion becomes illegal and people would be informed of the punishment. Once this happens, examples would be made, and people would be more sexually responsible and more sexually safer as a whole. More lives would be saved in the long term.

"China and North Korea have forced abortions." China at least doesn"t have them anymore. They ditched their One child policy in 2016(https://en.wikipedia.org...).

"How will that be monitored?" The same way any other law is enforced.

"How are they gonna pay for that?" If they can"t afford the fine, they can go to jail for about 5 weeks.

"put people with miscarriages on trial costing us a bunch of tax-payer dollars." The abortion rate after Roe V Wade in the short term was about 4x as high as it was before Roe V Wade. The current abortion rate is 12 per 1000 women (https://en.wikipedia.org...). Banning abortion while keeping and expanding conception control will bring this down to 3 per 1000 and falling. If 3 per 1000 women get trial cases of $200,000 each, as hefty as that would be, it would cost the average taxpayer about $300 a year, less than a dollar a day.

"Meanwhile, have to open more foster cares for all these children who"s parents are in jail." Not necessarily. The husband could marry someone else and then the kids won"t have to go into the foster care.

"This is the material made for a dystopian novel." It helps the baby who already often suffers a dystopia because their life is taken from them. It does not create a dystopia. It creates a world relatively free from abortions and STDs from the lack of premarital sex.

"until you pro-lifers decide to carry our unwanted fetuses in your own womb, I will decide what to do with my body." Many pro lifers do get pregnant and https://www.realclearpolitics.com... states that women are about as likely to be pro life as men are.
Debate Round No. 4
ABoleman

Pro

my argument is dependency on someone"s body to survive. you"re equating fetuses literally feeding off of a persons body in order to achieve personhood or exist to human-beings who are not reliant on someone"s body to exist. your comparison makes no sense.

How did they not have enough time to get adopted? Pro-lifers make it seem as though the demand of people wanting children is so high that it makes zero logical sense that it should take 4 years to adopt the 400,000 in foster care, yet you think 600,000 babies could be adopted per year? if it takes 4 years to adopt the 400,000 kids in the system imagine in 10 years when there are 6million unwanted babies. It would take 30,000 years to adopt those children alone if there were 200,000 adoptions per year. adoption agencies aka foster care systems don"t make themselves look bad to get people to sympathize, they deliberately lie to meet quotas, as was showcased in the article i provided. i"m sorry that i didn"t provide a citation of the opioid epidemic and its effects on children, it has literally been declared a national public health emergency so I assumed you would know this.

Please do not say people "recover from pain and it is often short term" as if it is a matter of fact. Foster care children have a greater risk of many mental problems: https://www.socsci.uci.edu... . Don"t just say people naturally toughen up and are stronger because of this when our suicide rate has increased 24%. https://www.cdc.gov...

Consequences come from everything in life, if I got injured in an accident should I be not be treated because driving was a risk, even though I had insurance?

How could women continue their education and job if they have complications in their pregnancy such as the ones I named? Are there 600,000 people annually who will finance the medical bills and all of their living expenses? No. If there were, it"s shameful that we have so many children waiting to be adopted in foster care.

Maybe someone might have a higher chance of dying in some cities, but they have the choice of leaving those cities. If someone has a higher chance of dying from a surgery than they do not getting the surgery, they have the right to choose their safest option.

If someone ran you over drunk driving, they don"t and should not be forced to give you their kidney. While they should pay your legal expenses and face the law for drunk driving, they still have bodily autonomy. Them making a mistake does not wave that right, not even for a person. A fetus is not a person, so this is not even an accurate comparison. I"m just stating that body autonomy is a basic right.

I never mentioned pro life in all circumstances. I don"t care about what % of pro-lifers vs pro-choicers support abortions at each stage. My point was that 79% of people (period) support abortion under some cases, be it rape, incest or the mothers life at risk. which shows me that the majority of people understand that a fetus is not a person or equivalent to the woman.

The rate of infants born to drugs is a direct result of drugs. I don"t even know where you were going with that statement

Not everyone can get "insurance" or save money, many people are living paycheck to paycheck believe it or not.

It is potentially a crime to accidentally shoot someone. It"s most certainly investigated & someone can easily be convicted of a crime based on "negligence" lets put these women through that to determine whether their miscarriage was "genuine" or not.The rate of miscarriage is 50%, there are approximately 5X more miscarriages than abortions. I don"t know why I should have to keep providing citations of evidence of things that are common knowledge regarding birth and life to someone who claims to be pro life but nonetheless: https://www.gstatic.com...

forced abortions are still maintained in china: https://www.pop.org... , I already stated that stricter abortions laws do not reduce abortions and that countries with stricter abortion laws typically have higher abortion rates but you choose to decide that that"s not a good comparison.

Right, you can monitor the way people have sex the same way you can monitor other laws. Again, this is like a dystopian novel. Keeping someone in jail for 5 weeks can cost roughly $16k per person, not to mention their legal fees.

What husband are you referring to that will take the mothers child when she"s in jail or attempts abortion? You do realize that the majority of women who abort are unmarried? A lot of men convince the woman to abort and pay for the procedure.

Banning abortion does not create a world relatively free from STDs nor abortion nor premarital sex, it does not protect a baby from suffering dystopia because fetuses are neither human-beings nor capable of suffering.

I don"t care if pro-lifers get pregnant. that"s their choice and none of my business. I specifically said until pro-lifers carry MY (aka the fetus of those who don"t want to carry it and want an abortion) fetus in their own body, I will decide if I want to carry this fetus or not.

The amount of money it would take to take care of these children in foster care or on welfare, combined with the legal costs and jail costs of persecuting women could easily go towards free birth control, giving foster children a better life, solving world hunger, but clearly you care more about fetuses than the actual human beings in this world. I"m glad your opinion doesn"t dictate my rights and my choice.
asta

Con

I would like to point out that I congratulate you for making it through 5 rounds. Your the 1st one to do it on this topic. Now that that"s done, time to move on to the points:

"you"re equating fetuses literally feeding off of a person's body in order to achieve personhood or exist to human-beings who are not reliant on someone's body to exist." Technically poor people are dependant on the bodies of the middle class because they depend on the work of them which requires bodily dependency in a way. A better comparison would be should a woman be forced to nurse her baby? If there were no other alternatives that would keep a baby alive, then yes, because life is more valuable than freedom in part because without life, there would be no freedom. Without freedom, there is a bad life. A bad life is better than no life, otherwise people with bad lives, like slaves would commit suicide more often then they do not. But this is not the case.

"How did they not have enough time to get adopted?" Because they were there for 3 years. And most of them got adopted anyway.

"if it takes 4 years to adopt the 400,000 kids in the system imagine in 10 years when there are 6million unwanted babies." This statistic is loaded. It"s more like, "if it takes 4 years to adopt the 600,000 kids in the system imagine in 1 year when there are 300,000 unwanted babies." The adoption agency doubles to triples in power. It probably won"t triple since some people will choose to parent their kids and that"s fine. It would probably double the foster kid count which increases the agency's power.

"adoption agencies aka foster care systems don"t make themselves look bad to get people to sympathize, they deliberately lie to meet quotas, as was showcased in the article i provided." If they lied, it would be news. Your .edu cite did not state they lied.

There is an opioid epidemic but is it disproportionately affecting foster kids? I needed a cite for that.

Your cite stated some mental disorders however, it is better to have mental disorders then to be dead. If a group had a certainty of getting all of those things, it would not justify their deaths. As someone who has autism, I am glad and lucky that I wasn't aborted. If my Mom was pro choice, then I might have been aborted because my dad is pro choice.

"Don"t just say people naturally toughen up and are stronger because of this when our suicide rate has increased 24%. https://www.cdc.gov...; This has nothing to do with adoption.

"if I got injured in an accident should I be not be treated because driving was a risk, even though I had insurance?" You should get treated. If a drunk driver caused the near death of someone and that drunk driver had to sacrifice a kidney to save the victim"s life, they should since they caused the accident through something that was their fault.

"How could women continue their education and job if they have complications in their pregnancy such as the ones I named?" Adoption. Health expenses can be covered by insurance. A plan to health insurance money can be found in the following link:

(http://www.debate.org...)

"Maybe someone might have a higher chance of dying in some cities, but they have the choice of leaving those cities." My point was that women are only slightly more likely to die from birth then from an abortion. They may be 14x more likely, but in reality, the death toll increase is only 1 per 10,000, since death from birth and abortion are extremely rare. You are more likely to die from something as trivial as living in a city.

"If someone ran you over drunk driving, they don"t and should not be forced to give you their kidney." Why not? They caused the accident through their own fault. They also should pay for legal expenses.

"Them making a mistake does not wave that right, not even for a person." Why not?

"A fetus is not a person" They should be since they are human.

"I"m just stating that body autonomy is a basic right." What"s a more basic right? The right to life. Without it all other rights are irrelevant. Body autonomy is a supplemental right by comparison.

"I never mentioned pro life in all circumstances. I don"t care about what % of pro-lifers vs pro-choicers support abortions at each stage."

"My point was that 79% of people (period) support abortion under some cases, be it rape, incest or the mothers life at risk."

If you don"t care about how popular an idea is, neither should I and neither should the voters.

"The rate of infants born to drugs is a direct result of drugs." Drugs like heroin might have a hereditic addiction. If they are born drug addicts, then they can get rehab.

"I already stated that stricter abortions laws do not reduce abortions and that countries with stricter abortion laws typically have higher abortion rates but you choose to decide that that"s not a good comparison." I said it was due to conception control, which should be legal.

"Keeping someone in jail for 5 weeks can cost roughly $16k per person, not to mention their legal fees." Then they pay for their jail expenses by labor. It"s hard, but premarital sex is serious. The punishment should also be serious. The work done by prisoners would be up to the prisons to decide, if it"s within reason.

"What husband are you referring to that will take the mothers child when she"s in jail or attempts abortion?" I thought they were families but the fact that they are not makes this easier. Then I don"t have to put families in this.

"A lot of men convince the woman to abort and pay for the procedure." They shouldn"t do that and abortion being illegal will help prevent them doing this.

"Banning abortion does not create a world relatively free from STDs nor abortion nor premarital sex," If you ban abortion, then it will make people more cautious of their sex lives, which not only helps prevent premarital sex, but it also prevents STD spread.

"it does not protect a baby from suffering dystopia because fetuses are neither human-beings nor capable of suffering." Science has confirmed that a fetus is a human being with meeting all the necessary chromosomes to be alive and by meeting all the necessary criteria for life. They can"t feel pain, but neither can a sleeping person. Is it okay to kill them? No.

Your basically saying, "You don"t know what it"s like to be pregnant" here. However, you also won"t be an aborted fetus. I don"t know what it"s like to be an aborted fetus. The pro life movement stands up for both the mother and the fetus. It allows the mother to choose whether or not to have sex, it allows the fetus to live. I allows the mother to set the kid up for adoption. It gives the mom 2 rights and it gives the fetus 1 right. Sounds like diversity to me, something that I"m assuming you enjoy. THe pro choice movement cares only about the woman, not very diverse in interests.

"The amount of money it would take to take care of these children in foster care or on welfare, combined with the legal costs and jail costs of persecuting women could easily go towards free birth control," Both can be provided with the tax plan in the following spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com...

Let me know what you think of it in the comment section.

"giving foster children a better life" While they are slightly more likely to get certain conditions, a slightly bad life with conditions is better than no life at all. People don"t get killed for having depression.

"solving world hunger" There are other ways for poor americans to get food other than welfare.
Debate Round No. 5
100 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by asta 2 weeks ago
asta
I posted the 100th comment!
Posted by ABoleman 2 weeks ago
ABoleman
@32doni32nido32 if so, Which we ALL at least eat plants, What places a zygote/ early term fetus above plants? They have basically the same level of "life"? Just because they could potentially become people? That argument would be valid when they reach a level of life that goes past just simply "living"
in biological terms, Much like a plant or bacteria lives. No harm is done during an abortion because the fetus at this stage is literally incapable of feeling pain or having sentience. If we were debating late term abortions it would be a different story. But roughly 98% of abortions are before 2nd trimester and almost 90% (or more) are 1st term. Late term abortions are almost always a life saving procedure or performed on women who had no access to one and makes a stupid and sometimes dangerous decision if not done legally.

I"m glad that you learned things through my debate and also that you respect my opinion. I respect yours just as much, And I do understand your position and respect it just as well. Ultimately I disagree and just want to explain why. Healthy and open-minded debates open up everyone"s mind, Even if you will stilll hold your belief and i"ll still hold mine, It makes a world of a difference to have a deeper understand of those who disagree. I will continue to be pro-choice because I can understand someone"s choice to carry and I can also understand someone"s choice to abort. At the end of the day it"s simply up to the person in that situation and my opinions are irrelevant.
Posted by ABoleman 2 weeks ago
ABoleman
@32doni32nido32 I said you"re pro-choice even though technically you are against abortion because you agree that it shouldn"t be illegalized on the terms that you know worse things would come out of making it illegal and that you recognize that you should not be making the choice for anyone because it"s not your place. Again pro choice is not pro abortion, My father feels exactly the same as you on this subject. Although he is personally against abortion, He knows that making it illegal would not eliminate the problem and further put women at risk. Therefore he is "pro-choice" despite the fact that he personally finds it wrong. You said that IF there were no negative effects you would want it illegal, But the if is an important modifier because it is not so. I am extremely pro-choice and even in my opinion, In a perfect world, Abortions would be next to none. Unwanted pregnancies would rarely happen, In the small chance that they did, Abortion would be on the table and it would be on the table for serious situations such as threat of the mothers life, Rape, Incest or serious complications to the fetus. However, We do not live in a perfect world.

Carrying a fetus to term (even when you want it, But especially when you don"t want it) is not simply an inconvenience to the woman carrying it, It changes your entire life for a long period of time or sometimes indefinitely. It is much more than an inconvenience.

And again, "life" is a very loose definition. I"ve been a vegan for years because I value animals as much as people. A sentient living being is different than life. Plants have life, Bacteria have life, However anyone can agree that just having the qualifications of life does not mean they are equatable to animals and people. Heck, Most people eat meat with no second thought despite the way we treat animals in factory farms in the US. Do you eat meat? Do you eat plants?
Posted by 32doni32nido32 4 weeks ago
32doni32nido32
@ABoleman

It seems that your decision was effective. For some reason, I had misinterpreted what you said and thought that you mean no one was to be forced to. Obviously, I was wrong. Sorry about that!

I also understand what you mean in the case of sarcasm. I think that the word can be traced to meaning "salt in wounds" which can describe it very well. Though I forget the source, I know I heard it about a year ago. But don't take my word for it; it could very well be wrong.

I don't find myself to be pro-choice. I don't believe that I should make a decision for someone else; that's not my place and I don't know what they're going through. But let's say I have the exact same situation as them; everyone is different and feels, Experiences, And thinks differently. I don't know how they feel, But I can relate to their situation and SOME of their feelings.
I also don't find myself to be pro-choice because if there were no negative effects (other than people disliking me), Then I would make abortion illegal. BUT imagine all the things that could happen, And how mothers could die when trying to get an illegal abortion because they doctor wasn't certified for it.
I recognize that having an abortion is a very difficult choice. I feel that these may be different, But maybe you think otherwise: an abortion is not a convenience, But the child is an inconvenience. I don't know how to explain it better than that but maybe I'll find a way to say it well later on.

So, As you said, You believe that the fetus is a human life, But it doesn't have a consciousness or any personhood to make it a full-on human. I believe that even though it may not have any awareness of things, That it is a human life and should be saved. That's basically it; it's an unborn human, And I don't think any harm should come to it.

But I completely respect your opinion/belief and I'm sorry if I ever came off as NOT doing that. I learned some more about the topic from you, So thanks! :D
Posted by ABoleman 4 weeks ago
ABoleman
@32doni32nido32, I understand what you mean about your sister needing to be on meds and not realizing that she needs to be on them so intervention sometimes is necessary. However this is not applicable to all people with mental illness. Again, My argument here is that because situations are unique it"s not right to force everyone to comply with your standards regarding what they choose to do with their body or mind. I was diagnosed with clinical depression almost 10 years ago and there have been times when I needed medication but usually I prefer cognitive therapy and that"s a choice I make for myself.

When having a debate on a serious topic, Sarcasm can be interpreted as rude or belittling, Sarcasm can make the other person go into defense mode and close off any productive form of conversation. I"m a very sarcastic person myself so I didn"t take offense but I just don"t think it"s a very good debate tactic.

It appears you are "pro-choice" as well, Just for different reasons than I am. Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion or encouraging abortion, It just means you believe each woman should have the right to choose.

I respect that you feel as though a fetus is a human. However, While I acknowledge that a fetus is technically human "life" I think that there is a stark contrast between something having "life" and personhood, Havng consciousness, Being sentient, Etc. We don"t have to agree, As long as we respect each other"s opinions, That"s perfectly okay by me. Btw getting an abortion for the majority of women is not a "convenience". It"s an intrusive procedure, Women are villianized for it, It is often a hard choice and it is expensive. There are so many reasons that she may still choose this procedure and it might be the best choice for her particular situation. I think in the future, If we increase affordable L-T birth control and sex education we will exponentially reduce abortion and that should be the goal, Not taking away someone"s choice.
Posted by 32doni32nido32 4 weeks ago
32doni32nido32
@ABoleman

I recognize that if I weren't born, That neither I nor my friends can experience the situation since, After all, It didn't happen. And I know that if my sister wasn't born, I wouldn't be able to think of her existence. But I'm saying that, Though at the time I hated it, The situation made me a better person than if I was a single child or a person with a "normal" sibling. The craziness in my household allowed me to help others who were experience similar craziness. Without the experience, I'd be extremely ignorant on the topic of mental illness and play the game of life too safely (not the board game :P).

I'm not sure how the sarcasm proves my argument isn't strong, It was more of a way of bluntly saying exactly how I felt than wording it the same way I am now.

I have no right to control how people live. Though I would encourage someone not to get an abortion, At the end of the day it's their choice and the most I can do is try to convince them out of it. But if it happens, It happens. Our opinions may differ, But at the end of the day, I do believe that abortion should be legal. As I said before, The consequences of making it illegal would be far worse. Sure, I don't encourage it, But I don't want to create a worse situation.
Overall, I believe that a fetus is a human and that they can be very influential. I wouldn't want that potential to go to waste because getting rid of him or her was a convenience.

I don't want to send the wrong message, But this is mostly for you rather than for me:
There's no need to be sorry for what my sister has. It may be a disadvantage in some cases, But there have been some very good things that have happened through it. I just don't want you to feel bad for anything that happened when it had an overall positive thing that happened because of it. I do feel empathetic for the situations you've had (one of which I can't relate to), But it gives you a good platform to speak which is overall good (in my opinion)
Posted by 32doni32nido32 4 weeks ago
32doni32nido32
@ABoleman

To start out with, I wanted to say what I did about the country because @mosc could bring it into question and say something along the lines of "well, What country did you live in? " so I wanted to clarify that I couldn't say that. Sorry for not addressing this before I said it. My fault.

Okay, I want to address the medication one first. My sister takes Lithium but for a time during the summer when my mom was getting radiation treatment, My sister wasn't on her meds and it was a BAD summer. I was stuck home, My mom was too tired from radiation to enforce medication rules or even try to get my sister to calm down, And my father was at work. I don't want to get too much into detail because I don't want to sound like a walking pity-party, But my sister, Once she was back on meds, Said that she felt better without them. She felt freer even though she was a completely different person. Though she didn't want to be on medication, The situation was out of hand and she NEEDED to be. She didn't recognize the need; she felt better off of it, After all.
Posted by mosc 4 weeks ago
mosc
@ABoleman,

What you write and how you express your opinion, Compares to a perfume to my nostrils. As an Israeli my cultural background bears little resemblance to great American cultural melting pot.

Israel, Its open to invasion from all sides. America enjoys relatively secure borders with its 2 neighbors Canada and Mexico. It has the Pacific and Atlantic oceans which separates this country from both Europe and Asia.

By contrast Israel exists as a trading route bottle neck. The Great Powers have fought countless wars to control this trading route which links Africa to Europe. America enjoys a largess of land and resources. Israel its a tiny speck of a country about the size of the State of New Jersey.
The EU imperialist pig states seek to convert all the Middle East into their back yard. Something similar to how the US views Central and South America. The political rhetoric of land for peace, Also called "the 2 State solution". . . These fancy nice sounding phrases act as a fig leaf covering the vagina of Eve in the Garden of Eden.
The Great Powers have strategic imperialist interests. Only a fool would believe that the British feel joy at the fall and collapse of their world empire. Same holds true with the French who murdered some 5 million Algerians to prevent that people from gaining their national Independence. The French did these war crimes - can not forgive Vietnam - in the 1950s and 60s! Even though Mahatma Gandhi opposed the Jewish State, Ya can't help but love the man for his destroying the Crown Jewel of the British Empire.
The Great Powers do not demand that America return the "occupied territories" of Texas, Utah, Arizona, And California back to Mexico. Yet these Great Powers routinely condemn Israel for recapturing territory in the 1967 Six Day War.
The US and all Europe and Russia - except of course Britain - did not recognize the illegal nationalization of E. Jerusalem and Samaria by Jordan in 1948. But all condemn Israel after 1967.
Posted by ABoleman 1 month ago
ABoleman
32doni32nido32, Per your wanting to live remark, The sarcasm wasn't needed to prove your point. It kind of just showcases that your argument is not that strong. I'll ignore the sarcasm and respond sincerely. For the same argument I used regarding you not imagining your life without your sister, You are already here. Thinking about what life would be like without you being born, And being glad that you are alive is only possible because you WERE born. If you weren't, You would literally not know the difference. If you never had been born, Your friends and family wouldn't have known the difference - they wouldn't have known you. I have already explained this, So if you don't comprehend that then that's beyond me. As a fetus, You didn't "want" anything because fetuses literally do not have consciousness. Also, Just to go along with your argument, Glad you're happy to be alive. A LOT of people are not, Look at the suicide rate increasing. Should these people be angry at their mother for not having an abortion? No, Because it makes no logical sense whatsoever.

Your adoption story is wonderful, I am happy that you found a good home. Whatever organization you're working for is a nonfactor in this argument. This argument is about why your personal opinions or experience come before someone else's, Why your opinion should have any consideration on what someone else chooses to do with their body. It doesn't and should not, Point blank.
Posted by ABoleman 1 month ago
ABoleman
32doni32nido32, Yes you can imagine what your life would be like without your sister because you know her and she has been born and has obvious connections in your life. I'm not stating that your sister is not an extremely important person in your life and denying that you wouldn't want to live without her. I'm stating that if she were aborted, You never would have known her, You never would have had anything to miss because she never would have come into existence. I found out recently my mother had a miscarriage once. As this fetus was never born, I have nothing to miss - it never existed. Same would apply if it had aborted. It is easy to say in retrospect after knowing someone that you can't imagine life without them, But if they never existed it would literally be a nonfactor.

You only mentioned bipolar disorder, That is what I responded to. I'm truly sorry for your mental health issues and I hope that they have been resolved or that you have found a healthy way to cope with them. Your situation regarding mental health is unique to you. You can find similarities amongst the illness, But ultimately they are all different. What works for you won't work for everyone. I would never advocate for all mentally ill people to be forcefully put on medications or forced to have a treatment plan that is against their wishes or potentially against their best interests. Hence it is not legal to forcefully make someone go through these treatments and take medications despite other people thinking they should have to. Same applies for abortion - it is a personal choice, It is the choice of the person who is mentally ill/carrying an unwanted fetus, It is their body and their decision.

I don't encourage abortions either, Most sane people do not run around encouraging them. I support the right to choose and minding my own business. You agreeing or not only carries relevance to your choices and actions, It's your opinion. People do a lot of stuff I don't agree with. That's
No votes have been placed for this debate.