The Instigator
NoorH606
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Sgt4Liberty
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points

Should Abortion be illegal?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 1 vote the winner is...
Sgt4Liberty
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/21/2016 Category: Economics
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 743 times Debate No: 86994
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (22)
Votes (1)

 

NoorH606

Con

The debate over whether or not abortion should be a legal option continues to divide Americans long after the US Supreme Court's 7-2 decision in Roe v. Wade declared the procedure a "fundamental right" on Jan. 22, 1973. I believe abortion should continue on to be legal because as the independence state we are free we all have freedom some people use that freedom has an excuse or to made bad choices but we have no right to fight or break the law. I really believe that abortion is wrong but it's not right to force anything upon anybody even if it's for the right reasons isn't that the whole point of the freedom of independence. If you think otherwise there are other ways you could try to prevent this not by using force but by proving your point with slides and information about your reasoning. Just remember we all have freed m just don't abuse the power.
Sgt4Liberty

Pro

First off, abortion is killing another human. Because that human is not already born, doesn't mean they don't exist. Second, you mention its your Freedom. Where is the babies freedom to choose to live?

Let me give you some real life decisions in my own family. My aunt made some not so good decisions and had a kid at 17 years old, but instead of having an abortion she gave her up for adoption. Then she had my cousin and decided to raise him since she was a couple years older and done with High school. Well my cousin lived sort of a rough life, meanwhile his unknown adopted sister was raised by a wealthy family in a nice neighborhood by a couple who couldn't have kids of their own. Another family example I have is someone close to me was taken advantage of (raped) and resulted in a child. She of course raised the child and he never knew what had happened. I sure either of these people (the children) would be devastated if they knew their mothers contemplated aborting them.

Just because these people "government" make something a law, doesn't mean that it's morally right. Is it right that Obama drone strikes people half way around the world, and because of "collateral damage" kills several dozen innocent women and children in the process? But it's legal right?

https://www.youtube.com...
Debate Round No. 1
NoorH606

Con

I understand what you are trying to say, but isn't the whole point of the Declaration independence ti be free and to have freedom. I am sorry about what happened in your family, but it was your Aunt"s choice to send it to adoption center right or to have a kid at 17 , that still reflects the same point on abortion you have a choice no one should be forced to do something even if it's not the right thing it will just persuade people to find other ways to please themselves. So everyone has a choice do you want to take that away from them?
Sgt4Liberty

Pro

You say "So everyone has a choice do you want to take that away from them?"

By killing babies, you're taking that choice away from the human the right to LIVE!! What if you're mother aborted (killed) you while in her womb? Wouldn't that be taking away YOUR CHOICE to live?

If someone commits suicide, or goes on a dangerous mission risking their lives, its THEIR OWN CHOICE to put THEIR LIFE on the line. But who are you to decide to take the life of an innocent human being for your own convenience?

I always here females say "Well, it's my body". However they're killing the "BODY" of another "HUMAN BEING". That's not their body.

So now I ask you, (WHO IS REALLY TAKING THE CHOICE AWAY FROM THE INDIVIDUAL)?

https://www.youtube.com...
Debate Round No. 2
NoorH606

Con

Wow you really did good but isn't the mother's choice in the beginning to have a baby so technically the choice of the baby's life is in her hands and if they can't carefully kill the baby and the mother doesn't want the baby don't you think then she will try other painful ways to kill the baby putting the baby and her life's at stake it's better to kill one than 2 right.
Sgt4Liberty

Pro

I would say it's better to kill NOBODY!! Why would you kill someone out of convenience? That makes you no better than extremists who go around cutting people's heads off in the name of religion. What kind of barbaric species are we to do these things? The life of a child should not be up to the mother to decide if he/she shall live or not. Why do we even think that this is acceptable? If the mother gets pregnant and then realizes that she can't care for the child, put the baby up for adoption. There are many couples who can't have babies, and would love to be able to adopt.

I can't believe we even think it's acceptable to make the decisions of killing an innocent human being for the sake of convenience. Having been in two tours of combat, and seeing lots of death and destruction, killing is something that I'm definitely not in favor of.

https://www.youtube.com...
Debate Round No. 3
NoorH606

Con

I agree with you but I also disagree. I know you're right that that shouldn't even be an option to kill babies but unfortunately, it is. So we have to talk reality not what if. Some mothers just don't want to know that they gave their child to a total stranger, but I think they should and some just want to know that they are rest at peace , because some one mih=ght find out that their child was sent to adoption or THAT PERSON WOULD TELL A CHILD ITS BETTER NOT to MAKE THE CHILD'S LIFE ALL IN SHAME EVEN IF IT MEANS KILLING THEM. oops caps
Sgt4Liberty

Pro

Unfortunately, it is something we have to deal with in today's society. We should make our best efforts in educating people that the baby can feel, and that abortions are (killing) another human. Also, I think its good to show how great and successful adoptions can be. My aunt's daughter, after 30 years, just reached out to my cousin (her brother) and she's now becoming part of their lives. She had a great childhood, and even though it was really tough for my aunt to do that, she knew in her heart that it was the right thing to do and she's glad & thankful she did put her up for adoption. I hope I get to meet her when I visit the family this summer. We as a society have generally changed our minds about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We can very well change our minds about abortion too.

Say "YES" to Life!!!
Debate Round No. 4
22 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by rohan1574 8 months ago
rohan1574
Dong away with morality . Abortion should continue to be legal in other ways too. It was after the Roe vs Wade case that Crime rates in America came down drastically and it contradicted speculations that crime rates would continue to soar . The reason Being the legalization of abortion.After legalization the cost of abortion plummeted which encouraged financially weak families to abort their little ones. And its logical to think that criminals bloom out from poor backgrounds.Now the blooming will get restricted after poor women have freedom to abort.So naturally crime rates went down after 20 years of the Roe vs wade case.Why 20 years? Kids take time to transform to criminals.
Posted by Stonehe4rt 9 months ago
Stonehe4rt
Oh true I read over that part. Ok well then as long as both sides agree it is murder and murder is a crime hence Abortion should indeed be illegal.
Posted by Sgt4Liberty 9 months ago
Sgt4Liberty
@Stonehe4rt Con did however admit that it was killing, and that the babies (or as Planned Parenthood redefined as FETUS), as a human being. So, I didn't really focus my arguments there.
Posted by Stonehe4rt 9 months ago
Stonehe4rt
Well both sides have presented their info, morally Pro is right and also legally when concerning who's right it is to live, not who has to take care of you. (That would be like saying the government should kill us all if it feels it cannot guide the people) However Con has argued that the child isn't reeaallly~ human so it should be okay to kill them since the mother doesn't want it when others may or it could still have a good life.

Just saying two different approaches to the matter.
Posted by Sgt4Liberty 9 months ago
Sgt4Liberty
Hopefully I get some votes!!!
Posted by Stonehe4rt 9 months ago
Stonehe4rt
Well the considerable difference in the number of darker skinned being aborted is of course the people's choice but it is also the desired out come of planned parenthood beginings. Also with the Crusades, many of them were framed for things they did not commit, of course there was bad people but it was originally formed to fight against the invasion of the Muslim army, the basically ISIS of today but they were on world conquest. Of course I am not saying every abortion is for the sake of Hitler xD just like every Christian can't be based off each other, but it is just another added fact to show that abortion was designed for murder. As well as the fact that humans today keep finding ways to techincallize who is human and who is not, also about killing brain dead patients. If you claim your Atheist then you just took whatever possible chance they had of maybe a future invention of saving them or whatnot and sent them to absolute nothingness where they will never have another chance and are truly dead with no chance for anything. Just like a child, you are sending that humans and destroying them before they even get a chance at anything in life
Posted by matt8800 9 months ago
matt8800
"Look up the founder of Planned Parent Hood. That's all you will ever need, the whole thing was designed for the attack of minorities. She has countless letters we have found and her own speeches and background all show clear proofs. It's easy just google it."

She has been dead for decades. Thats the same thing as saying Christianity is murderous by binging up the crusades. Since you want to change the system as it stands today, what current day example can you provide that Planned Parenthood participates in Eugenics?
Posted by matt8800 9 months ago
matt8800
"So by your logic every brain dead coma patient should die."

That is correct. I believe it is inhumane to artificially keep a body alive for someone that is no longer there. Would any reasonable person expect their family to spend their resources to keep a body alive after they are gone?
Posted by Stonehe4rt 9 months ago
Stonehe4rt
Also to your previous statement. So by your logic every brain dead coma patient should die.

Also we declare people dead when their heart stops, hence why don't we declare them alive when it starts? It starts earliest at the first week can go to two weeks, anything after that is blatant murder. Since the child has already developed part of its brain and has processes going on and a beating heart.
Posted by Stonehe4rt 9 months ago
Stonehe4rt
Look up the founder of Planned Parent Hood. That's all you will ever need, the whole thing was designed for the attack of minorities. She has countless letters we have found and her own speeches and background all show clear proofs. It's easy just google it.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Hylian_3000 9 months ago
Hylian_3000
NoorH606Sgt4LibertyTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Overall a moral debate. Both sides argued over morals and that complicates voting a little bit. Just to be clear, I'm pro choice, but that's not going to stop me from voting fairly. Conduct: Both had overall good conduct. There was some questionable choices from Pro though. Spelling and Grammar: Noticed some minor spelling mistakes in Con's arguments. Arguments: Pro wins this. His arguments were solid and Con did not do enough to to disprove them. Pro's arguments still stand at the end and Con has next to no arguments. Sources: Neither utilized sources (to my knowledge).