The Instigator
Stoned_Basilisk
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
alexmiller887
Pro (for)
Winning
19 Points

If A Woman Was Raped,Should The Child Be Aborted?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
alexmiller887
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/25/2014 Category: Health
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 539 times Debate No: 49850
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

Stoned_Basilisk

Con

I believe that every human created today,living, breathing, growing...we all wouldnt not be here if our parents had made the same choice.
alexmiller887

Pro

I accept. Put forth your contention.
Debate Round No. 1
Stoned_Basilisk

Con

How is this being contended? We are not God! Yet we can determine who lives and who dies,because of the way it was brought about? As many people are murdered,or are murderers, or just wasting their lives,,we dare take a life away willingly? No. We shouldnt. To kill,is simply most inhumane.
alexmiller887

Pro

Every single point you made was true and moral. However, they are all irrelevant. Every single one. Let me explain. How to define a human? A human, by [1] definition is a member of the human race. In the womb, an embryo- for that is the word, not human,
1. Is not sentient
2.Is not aware of it's surroundings until a very late date in the pregnancy.
Therefore, your points relating to morality are irrelevant.

If you can prove to me that a one week old ball of cells is human and can feel pain then this debate will be yours.
Thank you.

[1] https://www.google.co.uk...
Debate Round No. 2
Stoned_Basilisk

Con

Does humanity needed a certain amount to have definition?? To be valued as a human being ,yet to be born? Would YOU want to be aborted? Why not give the child a chance at life,like God and your parents gave you? If you feel like its too traumatic an experience to raise the child,offer it for adoption. But murder is wrong,no matter how much human it is.

A week ball of cells is human.
A embryo is human.

When a woman says shes pregnant,that means life is being created. You cant do that by yourself. You didnt create Adam nor it isnt right to destroy Adam. If everyone had your views,who would exist??
alexmiller887

Pro

Picture this. You are a woman. You have been raped by an unknown man. You are then told that you cannot have an abortion. Is this fair? No it is not. You are doing nothing more that rambling, you have failed to rebut, or meet any of my arguments. A week old embryo has no BRAIN. Are you suggesting that it somehow feels the 'psychic brainwaves?

'When a woman says shes pregnant,that means life is being created. You cant do that by yourself. You didnt create Adam nor it isnt right to destroy Adam. If everyone had your views,who would exist??'

I have no idea what you are trying to say here, but the one part I can understand is 'If everyone had your views,who would exist??'

I'm pretty sure the resolution of this debate is not. 'Should we not allow abortions' but 'If a woman is raped shoud the child be aborted.'

I recognise that beyond a certain stage (22 weeks) the embryo IS human, but this debate assumes that it is fairly early in the pregnancy.

Thank you for this debate. Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by alexmiller887 2 years ago
alexmiller887
Not really sure I wanted to do that. Thanks, but no thanks.
Posted by Jabuticaba 2 years ago
Jabuticaba
Why did you decline my challenge?
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Juris 2 years ago
Juris
Stoned_Basiliskalexmiller887Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro used reasonable arguments supported by science, while Con just reiterated his contention and relied mostly with the unknowable. Con committed appeal to heaven which is a form of fallacy and a religious bias.
Vote Placed by RowanM 2 years ago
RowanM
Stoned_Basiliskalexmiller887Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con used a combination of fallacious arguments and pro refuted most of them.
Vote Placed by Geogeer 2 years ago
Geogeer
Stoned_Basiliskalexmiller887Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Both arguments were poorly formed, while con noted that the unborn is indeed human he failed to conclude the argument or detail why pain is or is not an issue.
Vote Placed by Actionsspeak 2 years ago
Actionsspeak
Stoned_Basiliskalexmiller887Tied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro based his argument off of false ideas, and rhetorical questions.