Debate Rounds (3)
"...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.
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.
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.
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.
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
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.