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

Should Abortion be Legal?

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 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/12/2015 Category: Health
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 780 times Debate No: 82440
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (18)
Votes (2)




Hello, my name is Forever 23 and I am here bring forth my premise which is that abortions should be legal.

My ensuing roadmap will include first, defining this debate and finally divulging 2 of my own assertions into the debate.

Should- used to indicate obligation, duty, or correctness, typically when criticizing someone's actions.
Abortions- the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy.
Legal- permitted by law.

Now onto introducing my assertions

My first argument is that women should have control over their own bodies. Your body belongs to no one but you and yourself. You are the one to make the decisions about what happens to it. The right to decide what will happen to you includes abortion. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote in the 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, "The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives." Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in her dissenting opinion in Gonzales v. Carhart (2007) that undue restrictions on abortion infringe upon "a woman's autonomy to determine her life's course, and thus to enjoy equal citizenship stature." CNN senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, JD, stated that Roe v. Wade was "a landmark of what is, in the truest sense, women"s liberation. This is significant because being able to have control over yourself and your actions is a basic fundamental right. As a result, by taking it away from women, we are defying and disobeying the Constitution written by our founding fathers.

My second assertion is that woman who receive abortion are less likely to suffer mental health problems than women denied abortions. Many women are not ready to have children. They will be stresses if they know that they will need to face motherhood at sometimes such a young age. Many women never want to become mothers and that should be their choice. A Sep. 2013 peer-reviewed study comparing the mental health of women who received abortions to women denied abortions found that women who were denied abortions "felt more regret and anger" and "less relief and happiness" than women who had abortions. The same study also found that 95% of women who received abortions "felt it was the right decision" a week after the procedure. Studies by the American Psychological Association (APA), the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges (AMRC), and researchers at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health all concluded that purported links between abortion and mental health problems are unfounded. We want happy, healthy women in the United States. By banning abortion, we are not letting some woman be like that. As a result, many women will be depressed and the child can even ruin their lives.

Thank you. please vote for the proposition


R1. Right to control one's body.

The right to autonomy has classically applied to the right to privacy. The ability to submit oneself to the experiences they choose. This right has been used quite a bit in cases involving reproductive rights. However this right to do want a person wants to do with themselves is strictly defined in a modern society. It is too easy to list example after example where this right is highly restricted. In relation to reproductive rights, self sterilization by vasectomy or tube-tying is nearly impossible to have done if a person as no children. And this is just as related to reproductive rights.

But more to the point is that all of our actions are only as free until they impair the rights of another. I can have the freedom to participate in the experiences I want and to do what I want to do with my body only up to the point where it harms another. In some cases harming another need not be substantiated or at least subjectively defined such as walking around nude, carrying a sword in public, or amputating a healthy limb.

When a healthy zygote implants in a mothers womb, an intrusion upon her "autonomy" directed by nature not choice, has 46 chromosomes and is the composition of an unique genetic profile. A human being distinctly different though related to the mother. And in 99.99 % of cases the Mother made choices to have sex with someone fully knowing a pregnancy was a risk.

So as with most our rights, the right to "autonomy" is curbed to protect the rights of the forming human being. There is no stage when a human becomes human. They are human from first stage of development to the last. As a modern society if we elect that our primary concerns are for LIFE over the mother's pursuit of happiness, then we are obligated to use the law to protect the rights of everyone involved. Especially the unborn child who unlike the father or mother, didn't have a choice to e where they are.

R2. Mental health.

I don't see how regret is now a mental health disorder. Raising children can be quite stressful. But this does not logically lead to the termination of pregnancy to begin with. 3 healthier options would be reversible sterilization, safer sex to prevent pregnancy, and finally adoption.

According to studies conducted in Denmark, Finland and United States [1] Women who went through an abortion had higher death rates from those who elected not to have an abortion. Legalizing abortions and removing the consequences of risky sexual behavior encourages these young women to continue in risk-taking behavior. Leading them to die more often in every way. Die more often not just by disease and accidents by even by natural causes.

But as for the Mental health aspect specifically. The Major studies taken as whole show that women are depressed after getting abortions. That if the women have positive social support for the abortion the women will feel better. If the women lack other mental health problems they will recover faster. [2] It's not hard to imagine this being the exact same mental roller coaster of soldiers who kill people in combat. The evidence doesn't support that abortion in and of itself is beneficial to a women's mental health, but that their surroundings and social support is more indicative of mental well being.

Debate Round No. 1


Hello once again, my name is Forever 23 and I am here to bring forth my premise which is that abortions should be legal.

My ensuing roadmap will include refuting my opponents refutation, then restating my own points and finally introducing a new point into the debate.

They refuted the point that woman should be able to control their body by saying that the woman should not have had sex if she wasn't ready for the consequences. However, many women are not even able to make the choice. Because, many times woman get raped. According to Department of Justice, A 2013 study found that rape is grossly underreported in the United States.Furthermore, police departments around the country eliminate rapes from official records to "create the illusion of success in fighting violent crime".Based on the available data, 21.8% of American rapes of female victims are gang rapes. For the last reported year, 2013, the prevalence rate for all sexual assaults including rape was 0.1% (prevalence represents the number of victims, rather than the number of assaults since some are victimized more than once during the reporting period). The survey included males and females aged 12 . Since rapes are a subset of all sexual assaults, the prevalence of rape is lower than the combined statistic. Of those assaults, the BJS stated that 34.8% were reported to the police, up from 29.3% in 2004.. Therefore, many woman don't even have this decision in their hands.

The opposition refuted our second point by mentioning safer sex and how being pregnant can really lead to stress. However, many women lose jobs because of their pregnancy. They are forced to change their life styles. That is quite a stressful adjustment and I am sure that everyone can understand why. According to the marchofdimes, Pregnancy is a time of many changes. Your body, your emotions and the life of your family are changing. You may welcome these changes, but they can add new stresses to your life. Feeling stressed is common during pregnancy. But too much stress can make you uncomfortable. Stress can make you have trouble sleeping, have headaches, lose your appetite or overeat. High levels of stress that continue for a long time may cause health problems, like high blood pressure and heart disease.

Now onto restating my own assertions.
1. Right to control one's body.
2. Mental health.

The third assertion I will introduce is reproductive choice protects women from financial disadvantage. Many woman don't have money to support a child. They do not have a husband and the child will not be able to live a normal life. For a woman, it is simpler to get rid of a child than it is to have an extra burden. A Sep. 2005 survey in the peer-reviewed Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health asking women why they had an abortion found that 73% of respondents said they could not afford to have a baby, and 38% said giving birth would interfere with their education and career goals. An Oct. 2010 University of Massachusetts at Amherst study published in the peer-reviewed American Sociological Review found that women at all income levels earn less when they have children, with low-wage workers being most affected, suffering a 15% earnings penalty. Giving a child to a foster home is more cruel than it is to get rid of him. Children living in foster homes are neglected and would not be able to grow up as good US citizens.

Thank you. Please vote for proposition.


R1. Right to body.

First off I want to address that I said, in the majority of cases the sex that lead to the pregnancy was the woman's choice. The often paraded excuse of rape or incest is in my consideration a diversionary tactic. Less than one percent of abortions is performed due to rape. [1] Two wrongs do not make a right. If we as a society say that each unique human life is valuable, then the fetus should be protect no matter how it comes about.

Aside from the two wrongs don't make a right argument, it might surprise people that out of the 1% that got an abortion due to rape or incest most felt pressure from other people to get the procedure. And that 80% of women who became pregnant from a rape or incest later regret the choice for abortion.[2]

I guess my points were unheard by my opponent. That we do not legally have the right to do what ever we want with our bodies. And that that right like many of our other rights cease when they negatively impact ANOTHER body. In the case of pregnancy a woman made a choice to experience and use her body in a sexual event. A practice she would more than likely know ran the risk of getting her pregnant. At the moment of pregnancy a NEW BODY is formed. The body and human life of the fetus. Given that the fetus had no choice in the matter the responsibility can only land on the man and woman who had sex. Her right to her body only extends as until it meets the body of the fetus.

I see no reason why the fetus should suffer a painful fatal procedure for the choices of the woman.

R2. Mental Health

My opponent must have over looked the facts I presented that abortion increased premature death in women.[3a][3b][3c] And I responded to her argument that abortion was some how mentally healthier for women. I reassert that the mental health of women is more dependent on a supportive social environment than the actual loss of a fetus.

R3. Society has an obligation.

A Society only exists as long as the next generation is being replaced. Society in general then has a self interest in save guarding the next generation. Other cultures have ran into cultural death with the early adoption of abortion. Denmark has an ad campaign "Do it for Denmark" to encourage it's population to have more sex, even if it is with foreigners abroad. Liberal agendas and the destruction of the family unit, have lead to women seeking kids at later ages, using abortions often, men being demeaned and decreasing quality of sperm. All these things compound to have the Danish Culture dying.[4] Russia suffered a similar decline in their population and culture. [5] Which is why we see many European Countries in acting laws that limit the access to abortions, and encourage healthier options. [6] As Americans we don't have to suffer the same ill effects other countries have suffered. We can learn from their lessons. We can even make a stand for life that would benefit Society more than not.

R4. Financial Burden

It is no secret that children cost money. My opponent paints a bleak picture for an emotional response. The life of a single mother in a low wage job. But there are many factors that effect this outcome. And is problem of promiscuous sex. It is the burden brought about by engaging in life making events without establishing a life nurturing environment. With the way the laws are right now the Mother can too easily collect child support from the father. Obviously if she foregoes this additional revenue it is a choice she is making.

What I hear is the women and men should be free to make their choices with out the consequences. One reason why Women take a dip in income is the time they spend giving birth and raising kids. Culturally the same time is not afforded to men.

I don't agree that it is beneficial to kill innocent life, inflict premature death upon women, hide incestual rapes, for purpose of relieving a financial burden.

R5. Hides rape by incest.
In many states despite abortion being considered a surgical medical procedure, minors can get abortions without parental consent. In some states only one parent needs to consent for the minor. This allows young children that are being raped to get abortions in efforts to keep the crime hidden. [7] While rape and incest compose around 1% of all abortions. I think it essential to the conversation to recognize what this portion of the population really look like. As noted earlier 80% feel pressured to have an abortion and regret it afterwards. We know that minors compose this part of the spectrum as well. [8]

In Conclusion.

As a society we come together with the agreement that we will curb our freedoms, to erect a society of laws and rights. As a society we must prioritize what we consider more important to safe guard. Is it the next generation of Americans to carry on the culture? Is it Life over pleasure? Is it the innocent will not die for the choices of the responsible?

And when we look at abortion we find the evidence from the last 100 years that it is not safe for women. It is not conducive to a strong family unit, strong culture, or strong nation.

The only benefit's of abortion is a ready supply of fetal tissue for Big pharmacy. The people, the women, the children suffer for it.

Debate Round No. 2


Hello once again, this is Forever 23 and I am here to do the final repudiation and to restate my opponents arguments.

Their first assertion: Right to body.
In this assertion they stated that the fetus is a person and that he also has the right to life. However, the fetus is not "alive" until the mother gives birth. In addition, the fetus cant feel pain during the process. According to a 2010 review by Britain's Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, "most neuroscientists believe that the cortex is necessary for pain perception." The cortex does not become functional until at least the 26th week of a fetus' development, long after most abortions are performed. This finding was endorsed in 2012 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, [1] which stated that that there is "no legitimate scientific information that supports the statement that a fetus experiences pain."

Their Assertion 2: Women feel stress if they do get abortion
However, my opponent failed to see the multiple statistics we have presented to see rise of stress if women do not get abortion.

Their Assertion 3: They also stated that the world needs to reproduce. That's true, we need to enlarge the population, but in limited amounts. Many women also receive abortion because they might not be able to keep the child well nourished and etc. Giving a kid away to a foster home is very cruel. In fact, The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that about 805 million people of the 7.3 billion people in the world, or one in nine, were suffering from chronic undernourishment in 2012-2014. Almost all the hungry people, 791 million, live in developing countries, representing 13.5 percent, or one in eight, of the population of developing countries.

Their Assertion 4: Financial Burden
In this point, they stated that the fathers can supply money to the mother. However, many time this help isn't enough. According to, Basically, in setting the amount of alimony to be paid, courts look at:
"how much money each person could reasonably earn every month
"what the reasonable expenses are going to be for each of them, and
"whether an alimony award from one to the other would make it possible for each to go forward with a lifestyle somewhat close to what the couple had before they split"known in divorce law as "the standard of living established during the marriage.

If a woman already had sex, and became pregnant, yes its her fault, but abortion is the only option.

Their Assertion 5: Hides rape by incest.
However, abortion is not why woman do not report rape. There are many other reasons. According to United States Department of Justice document Criminal Victimization in the United States, there were overall 173,610 victims of rape or sexual assault, or 0.1% of the US population 12 or older in 2013.[5] While the Department of Justice does not publish a report on the breakout of rape vs. other kinds of sexual assault across the total US population, it does provide that level of detail in a related study of college aged women. The DOJ's Bureau of Justice Statistics indicated that among college women (aged 18-24) women who reported any kind of sexual assault, completed rape represented 33% of incidents between 1995 and 2013.

Overall, Im sure you can see that we need abortion to have a healthier and better society.

To summarize my points: 1. My first argument is that women should have control over their own bodies.
2. My second assertion is that woman who receive abortion are less likely to suffer mental health problems than women denied abortions.
3. The third assertion I will introduce is reproductive choice protects women from financial disadvantage.

Thank you please vote proposition.


R1. Women should have control over their own bodies.

All rights we have are legitimately stifled when the freedoms we seek negatively impacts another. The Fetus has their own body. Their own DNA. Abortion was legalized and the judges decided to use a measure of viability, as the delineation for the Fetus legal rights. When they did that doctors were able to give a good chance of living to premature babies at 28 weeks. Now the technology has advanced enough that premature babies born as young as 24 weeks, with the youngest being 21 weeks. [1] It would behoove people to look at what Amillia Taylor looked like at birth, 2 weeks before the legal abortion cut off date. She had head, feet, hands, heart, blood, stomach, lungs, throat, mouth, eyes, ears ect...

Clearly at 21 weeks a separate body. What rights did Amillia have to her body?

The mother got pregnant because of her own actions. Nature has decided after sex she bare the child. And her "rights" to her body end where the fetus life begins. This is how all of our rights work. The are not infinite, and they do not encapsulate all actions.

R2. ...woman who receive abortion are less likely to suffer mental health problems than women denied abortions.

I listed examples and studies in which rape survivors who got abortions latter regretted the decision. I also listed a study that concluded with the mental health of the women involved in an abortion had more to do with the support of friends and family. Which is always beneficial to a person's health. But affirming and support from friends doesn't make the action of an abortion rightful in accordance with a society of law.

And if we truly want to call ourselves a modern society of LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It should be clear that legalized abortion is against these tenets. Detrimental to the health of women, marginalizes life and children, and lends to cultural death.

R3. ...reproductive choice protects women from financial disadvantage.

And removing all cars from the united states will end teen driving deaths. And removing student debt will end the financial burden of thousands.

Let's not forget how women get pregnant. 99.9 % choose to have sex with a man. Knowing the risks of disease and pregnancy. Some choices humans make incur a financial burden. Not every burden or pain a human suffers requires the law or government to relieve.


Women who participate in abortions suffer earlier deaths than those that do not. Abortion can be linked to lower birth rates in countries and cultural death for a society. Abortion is prioritizing the happiness of the mother, over the life of the child.

We have an obligation ethically, morally, and for prosperity to end such a barbaric ritual.

Debate Round No. 3
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Mhykiel 8 months ago
Thanks for all the advice and comments
Posted by donald.keller 11 months ago
RFD for Forever23 v Mhykiel (Abortion)

Establishing BOP: BOP is on Pro, as she seeks to prove all abortions should be legal, based on the definitions given. This is neither Status Quo in thought or practice.

Pro can benefit greatly by using sources. Pro would also benefit by explaining arguments. Just saying that a group of studies are unfounded without explaining why isn't an argument... It's an opinion. Pro should also spend more time addressing arguments instead of agreeing and moving out from here...

Con can benefit by going both far AND wide. Not just using a number of arguments, but giving each some meat. The case for why the unborn is human is a good start, but expending on it would help. Bringing up child support helps, but going wide by describing all child aide would help. Bringing up health risks is great, but going wide with a full list of as many health risks as you can find would be a sound strategy.

The debate is split into well defined arguments, thankfully.

C1- Bodily Autonomy:

Pro's case starts on a strong note. She effectively throws into the ring a number of court cases and professional opinions that strengthen the idea that Bodily Autonomy is a female right, and therefore Abortion must also be. My only concern is that Bodily Autonomy can be used against her if Con establishes that the Fetus has the same right.

The response doesn't, itself, attack the source material (court cases and opinions.) He starts by bringing up the big case, that rights are not absolute... Even listing off cases were Bodily Autonomy is curbed. This breaks apart the authority of Pro's case by making it clear her case isn't absolute. But to break apart the substance itself, he must show that the fetus is human. He doesn't do this to full effect, as he lacks hard sourcing (or any sourcing), and only details in minimal how the fetus is a human. His case is still strong. The fetus is human, and Bodily Autonomy, like most rights, ends where his rig
Posted by donald.keller 11 months ago
Pro tries to reestablish herself, but not so effectively. She tries to attack the sex = agreement principle by claiming that a lot of women are raped. This seems like a good start, but she doesn't go anywhere with it. She spends a lot of time describing how under reported rape is, but not how common rape is, or pregnancy from rape.

Con essentially dismantles this argument. His stats on how many women get abortion for rape makes rapes insignificant for establishing BOP for Pro. His stats that most were pressured into doing it, and later regretted it, makes Pro's case negative impactful to her. Suddenly, abortion becomes the wrong choice. This case is effective because it targets each of the points of interest in Pro's whole case. Con reestablishes that his Right Are Voidable case was unaddressed. At this point, Con has established that rights stop where other's begin, and Abortion violates the fetus's rights, and that rape does not make abortion correct.

Pro's rebuttal is essentially unsustainable. Pro has already dropped the point on the fetus being alive, so bringing it up now does little for her. Assuming it were allowed, the claim is that the fetus isn't alive until birth. This is false, as it has been established by Con that the fetus is alive, and with no explanation, sourcing, academia, or even detail as to why this claim is true, Pro has nothing to discredit Con's well-detailed scientific explanation. Therefore, I consider this case a Con win. Pro has dropped Bodily Autonomy to attack a case that's already been dropped, and with a greatly insignificant explanation of why her claim is true. The claim that the fetus can't feel pain doesn't change much since the claim that abortion is painful was on sentence, and Con's case did
Posted by donald.keller 11 months ago
Con reestablishes, in force, that the fetus is a living human with rights. His case essentially solidifies his case. With Pro's last round taken into account, Con wins this case.

C2- Health

Pro establishes an unsourced study showing that women are happier with abortions. 95% is a large number. Being unsourced makes it undefendable, however. Any sourced counter-study will automatically outweigh it, especially since Pro doesn't even give the study a name. The case for female health in cases where the woman can not afford a child, or isn't ready, gives her side strength. Her biggest problem at this point is saying that all the other studies listed are unfounded. She doesn't explain how or even source to an article that does. Being strong, her arguments does good for her now, but will not last long if opposed by sourced articles.

Con responses to this by claiming that stress doesn't mean your first resort should be Abortions. While bringing up adoption is a good start, he doesn't establish why you can't pick abortion. It's true that his other arguments make abortion to be the wrong option, but only from a harms v other harms point-of-view. If Pro shows that pregnancy/adoption is more harmful than abortion, she'll have an advantage. Con does bring up that abortions lead to more death. For now, that's a good start, but Pro could bring up the death rate of pregnancy. Con does bring in that situations lead to happiness in women who had abortions, and not the abortion itself. It does mitigate a bit of Pro's case, but it hurts Con more. His argument establishes that abortion can be good if people stop mistreating women who had abortions. That the situation causes depression, not the abortion.
Posted by donald.keller 11 months ago
The next case from Pro isn't particularly strong. She explains that pregnancy means a vast number of changes, life-style wise and more... To start, losing their jobs isn't a strong case because it's not established. Pro doesn't source this. How many lose their jobs? The second part about changes would have been strong in the beginning, but so long as Con keeps established that the fetus is a living human, preserving your lifestyle becomes an insufficient reason to kill that living human. Pro must prove the unborn is not a living human, or that it's right to life/bodily autonomy is null. Pro, however, does nothing to counter against this. I'll state now that this essentially destroys Pro's odds of success. Now, Pro most prove that in all cases, the women's right to choice is superior to life... Especially hard since Pro doesn't really counter that the right to bodily autonomy is void when life is at stake.

Con addresses that Pro didn't address his case about mental health issues being environmental. This is true, which is good for Con, because it wasn't a particularly strong case at first. Now it's an established refutation. That same is true for the mental health refutations. Con does make the mistake of reasserting his case as a refutation to the new arguments. While it stands to refute the prior, these new arguments need to be addressed still, and he leaves that refutation in the hands of an argument I still find potentially harmful.

C3- Economic Advantages

A good place to start, but badly done. Pro makes good points about the cost of having a child, and how both the woman and child will suffer in life. Bringing up stats on how many women this includes does well for Pro... But...
Posted by donald.keller 11 months ago
"For a woman, it is simpler to get rid of a child than it is to have an extra burden."

Bad. Bad Pro. This is not positive-sensitive wood selection. Bad. Moving on, Pro's choice of words establish, against her benefit, that abortion is "getting rid" of the child. This verbal context makes her case harder to side with. Saying that getting an abortion is better can be believed, but I have a hard time agreeing that its better to get rid of a child via killing it then having to deal with him. This does not bold well for Pro, who's word choice complies to a darker idea of what abortion is.

Con hits harder on the sex = responsibility by establishing that Pro claims we should be allowed to kill children to avoid the consequence of our action. Con also hits on the point that financial relieve is not significant to killing someone, and that women can receive aide as well. I feel he would have benefited from bringing up how much aide is available, and by hitting harder on how not every woman is a minimum wage single mom in a broken system.

Pro asserts that child support isn't enough. I agree on the grounds that child support by itself isn't even. Had Con addressed the other child aide programs, this wouldn't have worked. The second assertion holds no weight, as claiming that women are at fault for their decisions, but only abortion is the right option, fails to make it past literally every round where she failed to prove that killing a fetus is acceptable to avoid consequence.

Con's response is to reassert that most pregnancy is created out of actions undertook with full awareness of what would happen, and that some choices lead to financial burden. Ultimately, Pro doesn't make a compelling case, and through out the debate, Con held strongly that choice = responsibility, and that killing a child is not an appropriate way to nullify that responsibility.
Posted by donald.keller 11 months ago
C4- Social Obligations

This was a weak case at first, as the idea that society will die because of abortion is an extreme. However, Con did much to establish that this is real. The extremity of this case, while making it a potentially easy target, makes it power while it stands.

Pro's response is that we do need to grow... In limited amounts. This doesn't address Con's case, as con gave examples that there wasn't enough growth. The case that there are too many poor and hungry is strong in those cases, but not in the US... Con doesn't return to this contention. It's to his benefit that this case wasn't important (while it would have been helpful) and that Pro's response doesn't gain her any ground. None-the-less, this is a Pro win.

C5- Hiding Rape

This is an odd case by Con, but it holds up. It doesn't carry much weight, however, because rape is so small a case to begin with, as Con has established.

Pro essentially claims only that abortion isn't used to hide rape while posting only a copy of the stats on how many rapes there are. This doesn't support her claim. She doesn't address how many rapes lead to abortions, or how women feel afterwards. This is a Con win.


Pro had a strong start, but after R1, Pro dropped and conceded too many points. Most importantly is that Pro's word-choice and very arguments seemed to concede that the unborn was a living human. Trying to argue that the unborn isn't after all that does nothing to nullify it.

Ultimately, Con established, almost entirely unchallenged, that the unborn is human, and the Right to Bodily Autonomy ends where inflicting death on the unborn starts. Pro never established that in all, or even most cases, abortion was necessary, or even okay. Con proved that most of Pro's cases were circumstance-based, and made up almost none of the overall abortion rate. Con also proved that the fetus was alive, and abortion was a violation of the unborn's rights.

Sources go Con because Pro used
Posted by whiteflame 11 months ago
>Reported vote: Stefanwaal// Mod action: NOT Removed<

3 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: The reason for my vote is in the comments.

[*Reason for non-removal*] The vote appears quite sufficient, analyzing all of the major arguments.

Note: The reporter suggests that the voter was prejudiced to vote for a given side. However, this misunderstands the voter's decision to provide their feelings on the matter of abortion. The voter apparently agrees with Pro's side, and despite that agreement, he finds that Con's arguments are stronger. If anything, this shows a decided lack of bias in the decision.
Posted by Mhykiel 11 months ago

Thank you for voting. I mean abortion is used to hide rape that occurs in incest relationships. I linked to a specific case in which such a thing did occur. Pro brought up rationalizing abortion with that not every woman who gets pregnant had a choice. Pro referred to the 1% that get an abortion due to incest ad rape. Delving deeper into the demographics of this 1% we see that 80% of them regret getting an abortion, felt pressured to do so. And that legalized abortion in many states don't require parental consent (consent that is required for all other surgical outpatient medical treatments), this has allowed illegal activity to be covered up. If I do another such debate I will be sure to elaborate on that point to include that minors lack (at least legally lack) the maturity to make informed responsible decisions about sexual activity but most definitely about their medical treatment and care.
Posted by Stefanwaal 11 months ago
Reason for vote part 2:

5. Hide rape by incest
Err.. wut? What does hiding rape by incest mean? Aren"t rape and incest two things that have little to do with each other? Did you maybe mean "hide rape or incest"? Anyway, con, are you saying abortion is bad, because minors who get raped and get pregnant use abortion because that way they don"t have to report the crime? What"s the alternative? That minors get raped, get pregnant, report the crime and then still get the child? This argument raises so many questions I"m just going to pretend it doesn"t exist.

Now to the points. Pro had the burden of proof and wasn"t able to meet it. After all, pro only had the financial argument at the end. Con had the argument that the fetus is alive and has its own body, which the mother isn"t allowed to harm. This is a stronger argument than the financial argument. All of this resulted in me giving con the arguments points.

I considered giving con the point for sources, because pro didn"t link her sources. However, I don"t want to give the sources point just because of that. After all, pro still mentioned multiple nice sources.

Both of the debaters had a good conduct and spelling. So those are both ties as well.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by donald.keller 11 months ago
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 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD provided on behalf of the Voter's Union // Message Donald.Keller or Whiteflame to have your unvoted debates given at least two votes. (RFD in comments.) ......................................................................... Edited at the end. "Sources go Con because Pro used none." Sorry for some missing words.
Vote Placed by Stefanwaal 11 months ago
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: The reason for my vote is in the comments.