The Instigator
Bernard
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Double_Helix46
Pro (for)
Winning
16 Points

Is abortion murder?

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 7 votes the winner is...
Double_Helix46
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/24/2012 Category: Health
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,944 times Debate No: 26529
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (6)
Votes (7)

 

Bernard

Con

To what extent do you agree that abortion is murder? I disagree about the morality of abortion because we disagree about what defines human nature. for the three months abortions may have absolutely no moral implications whatever it may be. first three months the embryo is no more awake than a kidney. our cuture hasn't come to agreement on that yet.
Double_Helix46

Pro

My opponent never gave us any specifics. Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy resulting in the death of a embryo or fetus. Termination is ending the existence of something. If we are ending the existence of something we are causing death to it. It is unlawful to terminate life. We call this murder. The unlawful termination of an individual's life, is perhaps the greatest offense that can be committed against anyone. All stages of abortion are available here and many equal unlawful murder.
Debate Round No. 1
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by TrasguTravieso 4 years ago
TrasguTravieso
@Double_Helix46 I understand this is difficult with the 500 character limit, but there was no argument to support the contention that the preborn life is a human life. It really should go without saying, but in a world that is so criminally insensitive to massive genocide of the unborn, that should have been a priority. It was a good try with what you were presented with though.
Posted by Double_Helix46 4 years ago
Double_Helix46
@Clash, I think I did that with the 500 characters I had to post with.
Posted by Clash 4 years ago
Clash
Pro, you could easily have showed that abortion is murder by simply just giving the definition of murder, which is the unlawful killing of another human. You could then argue that given the definition of murder, abortion is murder since it kills another human (i.e., The fetus/embryo) Of course, for this argument to successfully work, one must prove that the fetus/embryo is in fact human. This however wouldn't have been a hard task. Science makes it very clear that a fetus/embryo is a human.
Posted by Double_Helix46 4 years ago
Double_Helix46
I know voters do not know but Con had made the debate 60 minutes to post and only 500 characters.
Posted by Ronnie21 4 years ago
Ronnie21
I believe there is never a definite right or wrong in the morality sense, it is in my own personal sense of morality that abortion is inhumane no matter what the consequence is, but I do believe it should not be illegal or against the law, it says more about the individual rather than the law behind it. The fact that only the women's or carrier's opinion is taken into consideration and not the father/father figure/guardian figure other than the mother is not, is also wrong or illegal in my opinion.
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
I will now write an RFD that will probably end up being longer than the debate itself in order to justify voting the way I did.

Con's arguments were, from a technical perspective, largely irrelevant. Murder is the unlawful killing of one human being by another, according to some random online source. While Con does bring up slight doubts regarding what a human is ('because we disagree about what defines human nature.'), he fails to make a definitive statement regarding whether or not a fet,us or embryo is a human being ('may have absolutely no moral implications'). In addition, he fails to make any sort of statement regarding whether or not abortion is murder. He merely asks a question, and suggests that a fetus is not a human being, but fails to even go so far as to assert that a fetus is not a human being.

Pro, on the other hand, was a bit bolder. While similarly failing to make a definitive statement about whether or not a fetus or an embryo is a human being ('It is unlawful to terminate life.'), he does say 'We call this murder.', which is a pretty clear cut (though unsubstantiated) argument in favor of the resolution.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Torvald 4 years ago
Torvald
BernardDouble_Helix46Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:31 
Reasons for voting decision: I gave Conduct to the Pro because it was stupid to make a one round debate. I gave Arguments the Con because the Pro basically chanted a Pro-Life slogan, and did very poorly to refute the Con's statement.
Vote Placed by Muted 4 years ago
Muted
BernardDouble_Helix46Tied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did not fulfill his BoP. Bad debate overall
Vote Placed by TrasguTravieso 4 years ago
TrasguTravieso
BernardDouble_Helix46Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Neither really had arguments worth mentioning. I give pro the point for conduct for at least trying in a debate format that doesn't leaver room for.. well.. debate.
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
BernardDouble_Helix46Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: While neither side was terribly convincing, Con's assertions that abortion unlawfully terminates an individual's life was marginally more convincing. Additionally, given that Con apparently put a bunch of stupid restrictions on the debate, Pro did the best he could in a crappy situation.
Vote Placed by Clash 4 years ago
Clash
BernardDouble_Helix46Tied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: In my opinion, neither Con's nor Pro's argument were good or logical. However, Pro's argument was slightly more logical and valid. Thus, the argument point goes to Pro.
Vote Placed by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
BernardDouble_Helix46Tied
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: Firstguy initiated and argued first, but called himself Con. This is confusing. As far as I can tell, he didn't take a position, so he didn't meet his burden of proof. Therefore, Secondguy wins, even though Secondguy's arguments were terrible.
Vote Placed by baggins 4 years ago
baggins
BernardDouble_Helix46Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Con presented no reasoning to support his position. A 1:0 win since nothing more than that is deserved.