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

Planned Parenthood should be defunded by the USFG

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 2 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/5/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 886 times Debate No: 79354
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (23)
Votes (2)




Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Contentions, no rebuttals
Round 3: More contentions, no rebuttals
Round 4: Rebuttals. No defense of arguments allowed
Round 5: Defense of arguments
1. Please keep the discussion of the morality of abortion out of this debate, for it is an entire different topic and it would make the discussion far to broad. I want to have a discussion about Planned Parenthood and not morals of abortion.
2. Don't troll.
3. Keep your arguments on topic, while K's are allowed if you are making a K keep it as relevant as you can.
4. No forfeiture.
5. No semantics. If you accept this debate you agree to the terms layed out by myself.
Failure to follow these rules results in full forfeiture of 7 points to the opposing side.
6. Follow the agreed to debate structure.

USFG- United States Fedearl Government

Planned Parenthood- The non-profit organization that offers mostly reproductive services known as Planned Parenthood

defunded- Revoked on funding

should- implies the most beneficial option

Goodluck to you Lannan


I accept.

Get ready for Round 2!
Debate Round No. 1


Thanks for accepting, I'm sure we're going to have a great debate.

Contention 1: Planned Parenthood is a key contributor to biomedical research

PP is a uniqe and difficult to replace contributer to medical researchers. They donate a large supply of stem cells which is hard to obtain for the researchers. Planned Parenthood provides this in bulk. So you may be asking, why is this so important. Well stem cell research is an innovative new phenominon with absolutely amazing potential.

1. Stem cell research offers the possibility for cure of absolutely horrible chronic diseases, many of which are incurble.

We live in a world where people can just be just minding their own bussiness and then are given a death sentence. But, this isn't because they commited a crime and were given the death penalty. They are sentenced to death not by law enforcment, but by nature. Whether it be cancer, or ALS the rest is the same for millions. Death. Now I will quote author Mark Stern as he captures the torture of the disease known as ALS.

"For five years, I watched my best friend die of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, a terrible disease that causes one’s muscles to waste away. First he struggled to walk, then to speak, then to breathe. One tube pushed air into his lungs; another pushed nutrients into his stomach. Toward the end, he could only move his eyes. ALS does not affect the brain; through it all, he remained perfectly aware of his slow-motion torture. After years of suffering, he died of respiratory failure, his body skeletal and ravaged, his mind alert to his suffocation until the last moments of life."

It is societies ethical obligation to create a world with minimal disease as possible. There are countless of us who have lost loved ones to diseases. Those of us know best that pain their loved ones and the pain the person themselves have to go through. I am one of those people. At age 6 my my mother was diagnosed with breast cancer. Thankfully she was one of the lucky survivors. However, my grandfather was not so lucky. Earlier this year he died of pancreatic cancer. A type of cancer that is practically a death sentence to be diagnosed with. We should look at these losses and give these people a legacy of us creating a world where people don't have to die like this. Is it right for people to die for doing nothing wrong? More so, is it right for us to do nothing about it?

Now to continue on the article "Stem cells hold terrific promise for the treatment—and, eventually, the defeat—of ALS." Now I will remind you this is a disease that has been known for years and because of the complexity has seen litle to no progress in fighting the disease. Stem cells offer the possibility for progress that has not been achieved in decades for ALS.

Diseases like ALS aren't the only diseases that stem cell research can possibly cure, treat, or help us understand. Understanding the process of cell division and epigenetics in stell cells yield the potential for revoltionary treatment and cures for cancer. Stem cells also hold the potential for treatment of cardivascular disease which is a leading cause of death in the world.

It is our moral duty to create a disease free world and stem cell research is a critical step towards reaching that goal. Planned Parenthood is a huge contributor to this step. Cuting funding would be detrimental to the advancment of public health and medicine.

2. Stem cell research is absolutely amazing for the economy

Stem cell research is the epitome of innovation and advancment in economics. This research will revolutionize the economy. Let me give a few reasons why stem cell research is great for the economy.

A. New markets. There is a projected regenerative medicine market of 500 billion. That's huge. This would be a great addition to the economy that would help spur medicine growth as well as help hospitals and clinics.

B. Jobs. New researches and pharmacists will be needed for this research. In an economy with such a high unemployment rate this is precisly what we need.

C. Stem cell research helps eradicate diseases and sicknesses that are a huge ecpnomic burdon on society. Let's start small, ALS. ALS costs the US $256-$433 million yearly. Because it's a rare disease this isn't huge, but every bit of spending hurts. Now let's move onto cancer. In 2010 cancer cost the us 124.6 billion. In 2020 it is projected to reach 158 billion. We must continue funding PP in order to help lower these costs by contributing to stem cell research.

Contention 2: STDs and teen pregnancy

Teen pregnancy is a serious issue in America and STDs. Among developed countries we have the highest rate of teen pregnancy. If you read this report here: You will see the many ways that Planned Parenthood tackles this issue. It 1. Provides comprehensive sex education that teaches abstinence as well as sexual health information like condoms and other contraceptives. Comprehensive sex education has been proven to reduce STI infections as well unwanted pregnancy. If you read the report it also talks about how it is empirically proven that "Increased Use of Contraception Accounts for 86 Percent of the Recent Decline in
Teenage Pregnancy" So by providing teens with contraceptives we only help reduce rates of teen pregnancy, and that's exactly what Planned Parenthood does.

Also "Easy Access to Contraception Helps Reduce the Incidence and Cost of Teen Pregnancy" So again that's exactly what Planned Parenthood does. They also offer confidentiality which is proven to attract teens to their services, therefore reducing teen pregnancy.

Planned Parenthood should be kept publicly funded because they use the methods that are scientifically proven to work best, that is the best way to tackle the issue of teen pregnancy and the spread of horrible and preventable diseases. They do best, because they understand how teens think and do their absolute best to work with them. Many other programs do not do this, such as abstinence only sex education which has been shown to make the problem worse. Planned Parenthood should be kept because they are the solution we need. If we cut funding to them, I promise you the problem will get worse.

STDs take a huge drain on society. Gonnorea, Syphillis, and clamydia costs the U.S. 15.6 billion every year. Lately the prevelence of some stds have increased. A happen to young, low income, poorly eductated minorities. In a time with increasing STD rates sex education and cheap, accessible, resources to teens are key to reverse this trend. HIV is predicted to cost the US 30.7 billion next year.

Teen pregnancy in the U.S. costs the government 9.4 billion in 2010. While teen pregnancy is declining it is still a huge issue. In fact, researchers have concluded that the reason teen pregnancy is on the decline is because of increased contraceptive use. Increasing availability to the most efficient way to contraceptives is the way to go in this situation. A test in Saint Lois showed this.

A total of 8000 women were given access to free contraceptives. IUDs, the pill, condoms, everything. What were the results?

"Teen pregnancies - 80 percent of which are unintended - plummetted. They stood at 6.3 per 1,000 teens in the study group, compared to 34 per 1,000 teens nationally."

When women were offered free contraceptives those women's teen pregnancy rate is 18.5% of the national average. That's less than 5 times the national average rate.

For those of you who are against abortion you should fully support a plan like this. Under these women abortion rates were 44% of the national average. That's less than half of the regular abortions.

Free/cheap and easily accessible contraceptives is part of Planned Parenthood's mission. In other words, Planned Parenthood is a huge part of the solution to the problem of STDs and Teen pregnancy.

Now to conclude this contention I'm going to talk more about just how bad teen pregnancy is.
1. Teen pregnancy is detrimental to education. The parents are much less likely to
A. Learn anything in school while they have the kid. You stress the kids and distract them from what they should be doing at their age, learning.
B. Make the parents much more likely to drop out of highschool before finishing.
C. Most importantly you harm the child. They are far less likely to be sucessful in a school due to living in a household with a likely financially and emotionally instable family. They are more likely to cause trouble in class making teachers and students much less likely to help the child suceed in school.

Education is one of the best options to advance society. In order to foster societies development eliminating teen pregnancy is key.

2. Teen pregnancy increases crime, draining societies resources.
A. The parents are more likely to escape through their lives with drugs.
B. The parents are more likely to go to extreme, criminal methods to get money for their family.
C. The child grows up more likely to turn to gangs, drugs and a life of crime. They are likely in search of familial acceptance, escape from reality or trying to provide for their families.

3. The children are more likely to grow up in broken homes resulting in single motherhood
A. Children growing up in fatherless homes are 4 times as likely to live in poverty.
B. The children are much more likely to be dependent on alcohol or drugs.
C. The children are much more likely to fall to a life of crime.
D. The daughters are more likely to become teenage mothers and the sons are more likely to impregnate a teenager creating a full cycle.

4. The Children with teenage parents are more likely to become teanage mothers or impregnate a teenager.

5. The children are much more likely to be dependent on social programs like welfare or food stamps.
A. This drains societies economic resources.
B. Under these programs you are less likely to have a job, so you aren't contributing to the economy.


Contention 1: Kant's Categorical Imperiatives

P1.The Government should only act to enforce the imperatives of Perfect Duties.
P2. Abortion does not meet the standard of a Perfect Duty.
C1: Thus, the Government should not act to enforce abortion through the funding of planned parenthood..

""Kant's first formulation of the CI states that you are to “act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law... Perfect duties come in the form ‘One mustnever (or always) φ to the fullest extent possible in C’, while imperfect duties, since they enjoin the pursuit of an end, come in the form ‘One must sometimes and to some extent φ in C’" [1]

According to the above we see that Kant establishes two duties of that of the government; Perfect Duties and Imperfect Duties. Perfect Duties are those things of which the government must provide to ensure that the government and that society is fully functional. What are these things you may ask? These things are the simple things ensured under that of the Social Contract that you give up for a Civilized Society (not to kill, rape, steal, etc...). These things are indeed key as we can see that this ensures that of a Minarchy at the minimum. What that means is that the Government is to ensure that the people are safe. Everything else falls into that of the Imperfect Duties. Now note that these things may protect and benefit the public, we can see that if they're not of the Social Contract like ideals that they automatically fall into this category and SHOULD NOT be carried out by the government, but by Private entities. As a matter of fact the Planned Parenthood is actually the exact opposite of a Perfect Duty and is shown to be that of something that the Federal Government should protect against, or at least not do. I'll get more into this in a later contention.

We can see that this was provided in regards to my John Locke argument in this regards. I showed what a Perfect duty is that is that what protects the welfare of the people and ensures that the Social Contract is fully enforced. This escentially is that the government should protect it's citizens from themselves and foreign threats. [2]

"That government is best which governs least, because its people discipline themselves."- Thomas Jefferson

You have probably seen this quote many times before, although, not all the way through. This is a key thing about the change from the government in the 1800's to the government today. Jefferson understood that the government had no business interveening in the lives of the average citizen. We can see that the government was only meant to protect the citizens and interveen very little in the public soceity which is why the Founding Fathers made the Government system so complex.

We can both agree here that the funding of Public Funding of Planned Parenthood is indeed a Government business. Though one has to realize that the government offers many other programs on the same level from teaching abstinence to Sex education in schools. Now, more then ever, we have a large government and one that covers many things from the ACA. The ACA has began to force insurance companies to pay for contraceptions which is a key alternative to direct funding to Planned Parenthood. [3] We also cannot ignore the facts that I have brougth up last round that directly show that Planned Parenthood is detremental to soceity and not to mention that it mistreats their own employees. We cannot continue to fund an organnization that does these things and some how, in the wash of things, manages to loose $1.5 billion in federal funding. This is a key thing and these are key questions that we do not have the answers to and cannot fund an organization of this calliber.

“Any action is right if it can coexist with everyone's freedom in accordance with a universal law, or if on its maxim the freedom of choice of each can coexist with everyone's freedom in accordance with a universal law” [4]

We can see that if the government intervenes on the behalf on the people to infringe on that of an Imperfect duty that they would undermining humanity to achieve their due ends. We can see and must ensure that the Imperfect Duties are carried out by the Private Entites as things like people's health and Private debt is something that is to be delt with by the individual NOT the government. [5]

Contention 2: Moral Hazard.

Yes, you read right, moral hazad. The definition of moral hazard is "The risk that a party to a transaction has not entered into the contract in good faith, has provided misleading information about its assets, liabilities or credit capacity, or has an incentive to take unusual risks in a desperate attempt to earn a profit before the contract settles." [6] This is better known as "too big to fail." Now you may ask yourself why is this a moral hazard, the government funding Planned Parenthood? This is simple. Planned Parenthood does not have enough money to meet its opperation costs as seen bellow. Now you may ask yourself, "Where is the federal funding in that chart?" The answer is simple. The federal government has accounted for 46% of the organization's funds for this year. [7] This is an extreme crisis of the organization. Here we must apply a key principle of Hayek's and it is that of "Creative Destruction" meaning that when an organization or jobs go under then new ones replace it and this leads rise to inovation, however, when the government steps in to give subsidies or protects the industry then this doesn't happen. I'll make this a conparision. Say a child, a company, makes a sand castle on a beach, when the child leaves then a wave will wash the beach and there is no longer a sand castle, the next day another child will come and make a sand castle and so forth, but when the government gets involved then there can be no new sand castles made and the old one does not get destroyed as it is suppose to. When there is no competition nor is there no risk to go under then the company has no reason to take risky jumps and innovate. Milton Friedman has shown this in his book, "Free to Choose," where when a company recieves a subsidy and has no risk it ruins innovation.

The second point here is that of funding itself. When we look at the federal government's subsidies then we can see that it is taking money away from their tax budget. Say an average person has $100, instead of buying some food they need they give $20 to charity and now they cannot afford to get food. (I realize that you can still buy fod with $80, but this is just an example.) This is called Oppertunist Cost. We can see that in this case that the federal government can easily give this subsidy money to another organization like NASA, DOT, or DOE. There are several areas of the government that could use some more money for improvement and giving this subsidy to Planned Parenthood takes away from that. [7] The other alternative here is that of saving money. The US debt is $18 trillion and climbing. [8] Not only that, but the US trade deficiet has been rising and that is something that the US needs to continiously prevent as the US is continously deficet spending. Even if we use the Keynsian model we can still see that in times of economic boom that the federal government should not defiet spending, but the US Federal government is on a kick to continously use deficet spending and has continued to do so for quite some time.

Contention 3: The "Abortion" Issue

Now I know I stated that this debate isn't about abortion, but this argument is about the Planned Parenthood videos and the federal laws on the topic. NOT about the morality of abortion itself.

are all awhere of the recent videos of Planned Parenthood, but there is some actual controversy that is LEGAL behind the issue. The first I would like to introduce you into the Hyde Amendment. The Hyde amendment prevents any federal funding for abortions or abortion clinics. It also outlaws those of low income on Medicade and Medicare from getting an abortion with that type of insurance agency. [9] It is also no secrete that Planned Parenthood is that of an abortion clinic as they even have their own page on the subject. [10] So how did this funding get through, it was actually part of the funding package that was so long that many Congressmen and women didn't have time to read it.

I will have to go into this last contention a litle more indepth next round, but I'm out of characters. ;

1. (
2. (
3. (
4. (Lectures and Drafts on Political Philosophy, translated Frederick Rauscher and Kenneth Westphal (in preparation). Relevant contents: "Naturrecht Feyerabend" course lecture, fragments on political philosophy, and drafts of works in political philosophy.)
5. (Johnson, Robert. "Kant's Moral Philosophy." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2012.)
6. (
7. "Government Funding for Planned Parenthood (10 Years) | Your Money | Fox News." Fox News. FOX News Network, n.d. Web. 18 Aug. 2015.
7. "Chapter 2: The Effects of Subsidies." The Effects of Subsidies. Global Subsuidy Initiative, n.d. Web. 18 Aug. 2015. <;.
8. (
9. (
10. (
Debate Round No. 2


Unfortunetly my partner and I have came to the agreement to discontinue this debate. We have agreed to tie this debate. I am sorry for anyone who was excited about reading this debate.


I confirm what Con is saying.
Debate Round No. 3
Debate Round No. 4
Debate Round No. 5
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Greg4586 1 year ago
I was kind of hoping this debate would avoid the topic of abortion, but I guess I can understand your arguments aren't exactly about morality.
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
For some reason video 2 didn't come up. Here it is.
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
Exactly, that's why there's two rounds for contentions.

Posted by Greg4586 1 year ago
Well myself and Lannan have a lot more to say than what can be summarized in one round.
Posted by Fudge_Packer 1 year ago
Five rounds? I could summarize why these people should not get a dime in one round.
Posted by Greg4586 1 year ago
Alright I'll change it.
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
I'm sure I can fit it in.
Posted by Greg4586 1 year ago
Yes. We just don't have enough room for both rebuttals and defense of arguments. If you would like I can change one round of rebuttals to defense of arguments
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Balacafa 1 year ago
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Tie
Vote Placed by Unbelievable.Time 1 year ago
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Draw