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

Male Abortion

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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: 3/16/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 778 times Debate No: 88293
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)




This is a conversation certain corners of the Internet have been having recently and I noticed there weren't any debates about it on here (as far as I can tell) so I decided to open it up.

Male Abortion

"...the youth wing of Sweden"s Liberal Party have proposed allowing expectant fathers to "legally abort" their unborn babies right up until the 18th week of pregnancy " the cut off time for actual, physical abortions in the country."

"The male abortion would be a legal decision, allowing unwilling fathers to relinquish all parental rights and responsibilities for their unborn child. The father would have no future rights to see his child, but would be relieved of all financial responsibility."

Con will be arguing against "Male Abortion" on any grounds they please. Round 1 is for acceptance. I look forward to finding someone to debate this subject with.


Decided to take this debate as my first actual debate. Hope you don't mind debating with a 13 year old who joined the site 2-3 days ago.
Debate Round No. 1


Here's the link to an article about it, couldn't find the article I quoted.

I haven't been a part of this site very long so I don't mind debating with someone new to it at all.
I'm going to start my side of this debate with a pretty simple argument. Women have the right to choose whether or not to abort a child completely on their own. The doctor doesn't legally have to get the permission of both the mother and father to perform the procedure, meaning that it is completely up to the woman whether that child is born or not. Giving men the same choice a woman gets (albeit minus the actual termination part) is equality at it's finest. A man shouldn't be forced into a financial obligation due to a woman choosing to keep a child he doesn't want.


Hello again, thanks once more for starting this debate and for being okay to debate with a newbie.

You stated that women have the right to choose whether or not to abort a child completely on their own. There's been a famous court case which was "Planned Pregnancy Vs. Casey" this case was so important because it stated that Casey had to notify the father about the Abortion and a 24 hour waiting period was implemented so the father would have some time to argue his case, etc. This means that the woman actually doesn't have full control where to abort or not to. (Read the full case in the sources)

I am also against male abortion for the following reasons:

Sex is a responsibility.
To have sex one must be of legal age just like drinking or driving. Nobody would want a 10 year old driving because they would go rampant destroying anything, this is because they are not responsible enough to understand actions and consequences. Just like driving you must be responsible for sex. You must be able to understand the consequences of sex such as STDs or in this care having a child. If you aren't responsible enough to use contraceptives then you"re not responsible enough to have sex and therefore should be punished the same way as underage driving or drinking. For these irresponsible people male abortions shouldn't even be thought about.

It's too late to abort.
Abortions are fine up to the 16-18 weeks. When this period is over which is normally more than half way through the pregnancy abortion starts getting dangerous. However pro stated that men can have "male abortions" on the 18th week. This means that after everything is agreed after the father and mother have decided that they will have the baby, the father can still opt out even when it is too late for the mother. If a douchebag does this then the mother who may be financially unstable will not be able to care for the baby and will either live in poverty or she must give her child to an orphanage; both are terrible things.

Also, by chance do you know how to put images, bold text and underlined text? I"ve seen it on other debates but don"t know how.

Debate Round No. 2


I'll be honest I'm going to skip the part where I give sources due to Internet issues and time constraints. I'll instead try to stick to things that don't require sources, save for this first point. Roe v Wade (1973) a court case that decided that no state could completely outlaw abortions, giving it the status of a right rather than a luxury. My point of course is that its only logical that a man have the same rights a woman has, even if they have to be bent to keep him from encroaching onto hers. ( side note Planned Parenthood v Casey made it so that women in the state of Pennsylvania had to give "informal consent" and as such doesn't really fit into this argument of this being a right for humans as a whole.)

My rebuttal to your second point will be much more opinion based but will follow similar logic to my last. There is no age restriction on sex besides it being illegal for those above eighteen years of age to engage in sexual acts with those younger than eighteen years of age, and even those numbers aren't set in stone as it varies state to state and country to country. On the subject of sex being a responsibility one must simply look around at the modern world. We have pills to help prevent pregnancy, we have condoms to help prevent pregnancy, we have pills to terminate pregnancy, and if all else fails we have a procedure that is rather simple and hardly ever endangers the mother. Your argument is taking abortion out of the equation, but its a part of the "responsibility" package. Getting an abortion because you can't afford (or aren't in any shape) to raise a child is much more responsible than giving it to The State to live off of tax dollars or having it due to the taboo of getting rid of it. Sex is sex and we have many ways to prevent and end pregnancy, forcing a punishment on someone who had other options seems rather cruel to me.

Yes, Sweden was looking to allow "Male abortions" up to the eighteen week mark. I however am arguing for male abortion as a whole. Simply changing the time frame to twelve or thirteen weeks is enough to counter your point. We could of course also argue that a woman could simply hide her pregnancy until the eighteen weeks are up, making her the "douchebag" in this scenario. The fact that some people would abuse this system to cause pain to others is no reason to simply drop it. Any system can be corrupted, we always find a way. The good outweighs the bad in this case.

As a final note I would like to say that I too have seen images, bold text and underlined text on this site before, though I don't know how to do any of them myself.

To conclude this round I'd like to reiterate my main point. Feminists seek equal rights, they fight for them every single day. This is one of the only times I've seen men have a chance to actually get a right that women have, that women claim can't be denied to them. A man deserves a choice.

oh, Roe v Wade.


Hello, sorry for the really really long wait time. I couldn't post my debate because some sort of error, HTTP 500? Know how to fix it by chance?

Anyway since most of your arguments and mine are opinion based I can't really counter as we both just have different opinions so i'll let the voters decide who wins.

Thanks a lot for hosting my first debate! :D
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Emmarie 2 years ago
It's about time! Wish they'd consider this in the US. When Clintons reformed welfare in the 90's, they forced dads who planned on taking no responsibility, to pay child support. Single moms were economical geniuses with what we could do with $440/month, if we co-habitated with extended family or other single moms. When men were forced to pay, they demanded rights they didn't really want, and put undue stress on moms who were surviving without them prior to needing their money. It caused harm to the kids, by being forced to be in the company and resented by someone who didn't want them, just for being born. Kids are sensitive to the vibes of people and are better off in the company of someone who wants them. Welfare reform needed to happen, but they should have done it much more gradually and considered the points I just expressed.
Posted by illegalcombat 2 years ago
When I first read it I was like what, males can force abortion ?

Then re-read oh...............LEGAL abortion. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
Really cool topic actually. Only thing I'd change is adding a link to the article you're quoting, and perhaps a couple definitions.

Fairly likely some nut-job will click accept challenge, before even reading what you said, thus giving you a really easy victory.
Posted by BackCommander 2 years ago
I'm sure someone will be along at any moment to tell me I'm a moron lol.
Posted by Questions-Answers 2 years ago
Great point! Pity I don't time to debate it.
No votes have been placed for this debate.