The Instigator
DarkBitch
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Puck
Con (against)
Winning
32 Points

Partial Birth Abortion Should Not Be Allowed Even If A Woman Was Raped.

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/21/2008 Category: Health
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,975 times Debate No: 5104
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (21)
Votes (6)

 

DarkBitch

Pro

Ok here is my challenge

I want this debate to be specific, My argument is against partial birth abortion (PBA) in the case of a woman having conceived through rape only!
I don't wish to debate about PBA being used in cases of fetal disability or anything like that.

My argument is a woman who is raped and conceives as a result of that rape should not legally be allowed to have a partial birth abortion.
If you believe she should be allowed then lets debate.

Please note I am not talking about routine early stage abortions just PBA.
Puck

Con

President Bush in 2003 prohibited doctors from knowingly performing a "partial-birth" abortion. However partial-birth is hardly a medical term. It's a clear political one, and greatly confusing at that. Both parties (pro life/pro choice) differ on the number of procedures that take place, at what stage in pregnancy, and the precise procedures the law prohibits.

It was first phrased by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) in 1995 describing a relatively recent medical procedure to remove foetuses from the womb - also known as dilation and extraction, or D&X, and intact D&E.

"An abortion in which the person performing the abortion, deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother, for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus; and performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus. (18 U.S. Code 1531)"

Note there are no developmental stages or periods of development inherent in the definition.

Legal Precedents:

1.The Roe Court (Roe v. Wade) deemed abortion a fundamental right under the United States Constitution.

"..right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy."

2.Stenberg v. Carhart

The Court struck down the law, finding the Nebraska statute criminalizing "partial birth abortion[s]"

3.Planned Parenthood v. Casey

"..upholding what it called the "essential holding" of Roe. .. the right to abortion is grounded in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, .. "[i]f the right of privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child."

==

Abortion is a moral right, which must be left to the singular judgment of the woman concerned. Abortion is a right - the conclusion from recognising a woman's body is her own, and her own to do with as she pleases. A woman is a self-governing living being with the rational capacities that make it relevant to regard her as having rights and rights are derived from the nature of man. They are pertinent to beings with certain characteristics. Rights are founded on the reality that the employ of force against others is an unreliable means of gaining values, while dealing with others by production and trade is. Given this, the rational conclusion is to prohibit force from normal, value-seeking interactions with others, and to constrain its use to self-defence and objectively controlled retaliation. Individual rights, then, define the areas or aspects of action which should be free from force. There is the singular right to one's life, and the freedom of endeavour that one requires in order to achieve happiness in it. One's rights to property, contract, and freedom of speech are all consequences or functions of this basic right to life. This right is not a positive claim on anyone else, and it is not bounded to a limited scope of action.

As they are incapable of supporting themselves by reason, we cannot extend this right to infants or the unborn in a clear-cut manner. An infant may have a developing rational mind, but it cannot use it to support its life - in reality, it needs so much care that to impart to it the full right to life and liberty is to relegate it to death.

There are no reasons to deny people a choice in accepting great obligations. A protected legal right to abortion ensures that the commitment of pregnancy and parenthood can be met and chosen on their own qualities, and not carried out unwillingly. Naturally this would matter little if it could be demonstrated that a foetus is a creature with rights, to which obligation is automatically incurred. However it is not such a being.

==

Implications with rape:

It seems pointless to argue rape as a clause for abortion in this debate. If the foetus is aborted, the manner of conception is irrelevant. Instead I shall follow the logical conclusion of Pro's resolution; that being the forced (legally) birth of a child conceived from rape.

If the state mandates the birth of the child through force by legislation (i.e. criminal prosecution as foeticide on the advent of abortion) then the state has committed a grave violation of the mother's rights - as indicated earlier it expressly violates an individual's right to privacy. There are however other implications to this act. The state, by enforcing a birth against the will of the parent, must then accept the born child as one purely of the state. It has every responsibility to remove the child from the parent and ensure its welfare at the states cost. To do otherwise is to penalise the mother 18 years of cost, health, time and potential for the non-crime of being raped.

The second implication is that by forcing the birth of the foetus; upon its birth, the state has engaged in a process of profiteering directly from the crime of rape. A child is a citizen, and a citizen has the potential to be a productive entity in society. In fact the state actively pursues this interest in all children through health and education. This productive citizen, a child from rape, born by state enforcement, provides the state with revenue i.e. taxes. The state benefits to a greater or lesser extent (depending on the citizen's productivity) - it is direct profiteering through crime -the rape in this case (taxes are for another day). ;)
Debate Round No. 1
DarkBitch

Pro

Unfortunately due to work/family commitments I have to concede this argument.
I just don't have time to continue as I would like.
I sincerely apologise to you Puck and ask that we can continue this debate at a later date.
(I hope you don't feel I've wasted your time.)
I hope we can continue very soon.

DB.
Puck

Con

Not a problem, sorry that you are too busy. We can go again when you have the time. :)

Character Limits.
Debate Round No. 2
DarkBitch

Pro

DarkBitch forfeited this round.
Puck

Con

An unfortunate conclusion to the debate. Oh well.
Debate Round No. 3
21 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
Similarly, no animal has any inherent rights. If you disagree then investigate the arbitrary value of what animals are given rights and those that are not. The only "rights" an animal receives are those that are given to them by any one individual.
Posted by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
"I disagree that one is endowed with rights upon their ability to sustain themselves through reason. It is not the ability to reason that grants us natural rights but simply by virtue of being a "human" that we are granted life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, etc. A fetus, being a human, especially one eligible for partial birth abortion, retains the right to life and as is presumed to desire to exercise that right."

The fact we are human offers no discernible quality to garner any rights. Human is merely a type of classification, the same process we subject all species to. This is why we must look at those qualities that seperate us from other animals. Pure taxonomic differences mean nothing, it merely indicates that we are different, much like any other species is different from another. We must then look towards what in essence distinguishes us again, and this clearly is a philosophical question, not a biological one. The facet that seperates us from all other animals is the use of a rational mind, and it is this reason that we can attribute rights - we and we alone have the rational faculties.

"Also the fact that the fetus relies on others to sustain life does not inhibit us to impart upon it the full right to life as many of the elderly rely on others greatly in sustaining their life, this does not keep us from imparting upon them the right to life and certainly does not relegate them to death. I doubt that you would advocate we execute persons upon their inability to live fully sovereign or partially sovereign lives."

It is a false analogy; an elderly person has had the use of rational faculties, moral contracts and individual values of support are why we don't euthanise indiscriminately. A foetus has neither the ability of a rational mind to have inherent rights, nor the birth to ensure a moral contract from its mother.
Posted by Seth0311 8 years ago
Seth0311
"As they are incapable of supporting themselves by reason, we cannot extend this right to infants or the unborn in a clear-cut manner. An infant may have a developing rational mind, but it cannot use it to support its life - in reality, it needs so much care that to impart to it the full right to life and liberty is to relegate it to death."

I disagree that one is endowed with rights upon their ability to sustain themselves through reason. It is not the ability to reason that grants us natural rights but simply by virtue of being a "human" that we are granted life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, etc. A fetus, being a human, especially one eligible for partial birth abortion, retains the right to life and as is presumed to desire to exercise that right.
Also the fact that the fetus relies on others to sustain life does not inhibit us to impart upon it the full right to life as many of the elderly rely on others greatly in sustaining their life, this does not keep us from imparting upon them the right to life and certainly does not relegate them to death. I doubt that you would advocate we execute persons upon their inability to live fully sovereign or partially sovereign lives.
I'll leave it at that for now and look forward to your reply.
Posted by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
Lol. Yes, form not used in the, United States of and so on.
Posted by Rezzealaux 8 years ago
Rezzealaux
ohsit.

it's a real word.

/facepalm
Posted by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
Do you mean "foetus"?

Character Limits.
Posted by Rezzealaux 8 years ago
Rezzealaux
john's curse.

it distorts what you want to say. usually grammatically. but for you it was spelling :o
Posted by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
"You have john's curse too."

0.- I have what now?
Posted by Rezzealaux 8 years ago
Rezzealaux
"It seems pointless to argue rape as a clause for abortion in this debate. If the foetus is aborted, the manner of conception is irrelevant."

You have john's curse too.
Posted by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
Note: "rights are derived from the nature of man." refers to humanity in general
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by FemaleGamer 7 years ago
FemaleGamer
DarkBitchPuckTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Ineffablesquirrel 8 years ago
Ineffablesquirrel
DarkBitchPuckTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by DoctrinallyCorrect 8 years ago
DoctrinallyCorrect
DarkBitchPuckTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
DarkBitchPuckTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by brittwaller 8 years ago
brittwaller
DarkBitchPuckTied
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 
Vote Placed by Zerosmelt 8 years ago
Zerosmelt
DarkBitchPuckTied
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