The Instigator
Arrogant
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
TBR
Pro (for)
Winning
27 Points

Should abortion be legal or illegal?

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 6 votes the winner is...
TBR
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/6/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,681 times Debate No: 73034
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (88)
Votes (6)

 

Arrogant

Con

Could be your choice but is it your baby's?

A mother kills her unborn child because it is unwanted, but she's not charged for murder. Is it right? There is about 46 million abortions per year worldwide, and approximately 115,000 per day, but why? Is it because rape or incest, health problems with either the mother or the child, or just because the baby's unwanted or inconvenient at the time? (The Alan Guttmacher Institute.) Abortion should be banned because too many babies are being killed from abortion, if you don't want a child you could always put it up for adoption, and most mothers don't understand the consequences that occur from abortion.

Is there really a difference between abortion and murder? If a doctor killed a child one minute after it was born it would be murder, but if a doctor killed a child one minute before the child was born it would be the mothers choice. 52% of abortions occur before the 9th week of pregnancy, 25% happen between the 9th & 10th week, 12% happen between the 11th and 12th week, 6% happen between the 13th & 15th week, 4% happen between the 16th & 20th week, and 1% of all abortions happen after the 20th week of pregnancy. (The Alan Guttmacher Institute.) You could have a baby that's born at week 22 and still have a 15% chance of living. (Siegel, Reva) If the mothers didn't want the babies she could have always put them up for adoption.

There are 1.5 million adopted children in the United States. (Fields, Jason,) If the parents weren't ready to have to a child, instead of abortion there's adoption. There are different types of adoption. Foster care adoption is the adoption of children in state care for whom reunification with their birth parents is not possible for safety or other reasons. Private adoption can be arranged either through an agency or through independent adoption. Adoption is a lot safer than abortion, if people knew the facts about abortion i bet they'd rather give their child for adoption rather than having an abortion.

Abortion can cause many different complications with future pregnancies, or just complications like bladder injury, or breast cancer. In future pregnancies you'd be less likely to have a normal delivery, and the baby is more likely to be premature. (Arvay et al.) If you were going to take this big of a risk, wouldn't you rather just choose adoption?

I challenge you.
TBR

Pro

I accept cons challenge.

I will use round one to define some terms, and offer some concessions in an effort to cut through debate sticking points.

Concessions

A zygote-embryo-fetus is alive
It converts nutrients and oxygen into energy that allows for cell division, multiplication, and growth. It is alive.

A zygote-embryo-fetus is human
It is DNA is that of a human, allowed to mature it will become a person.

Personhood is ambiguous
Unless absolutely necessary within the context of the debate, I will not argue over “personhood” – only realize that each side has somewhat conflicting definitions.

I request Con concede to this one point

Abortion is NOT murder
Abortion does not fit the proper definition of murder. This term is inflammatory rhetoric within the debate. Con may choose to argue that abortion should be considered murder, but not that it is. (if you do not accept this, make that clear in the round you post).


Debate Round No. 1
Arrogant

Con

I will now rebuttal and state my argument on how abortion is murder:

Abortion is murder. Each abortion snuffs out an innocent human life. Tragically, doctors have deceived the American public. Referring to unborn babies as "fetus," "embryo," or "zygote," may be scientifically correct, but does not change the fact: These little ones are little human beings. Though called "parasite," "blob," or "tissue," give each wee creature about 266 days after conception and see what emerges from his mother's womb. It will be a human baby, not a zebra, a trout, frog or an orangutan.

Remember, don't be deceived by folks (even doctors) who call a tail a leg - or humans anything but humans. When a human egg and a human sperm unite, the resulting individual is simply human. Given time, nutrition and protection, he or she will grow to maturity. Calling abortion a "termination" or "evacuating the uterus" doesn't change its reality as murder-slaughtering a human being with premeditated malice.
TBR

Pro

Abortion has been legal in the United States for most of the country’s history. From the countries founding until the mid to late 1800’s there were few if any state limitations on abortion procedures. Between the late 1800’s and 1973 a number of states slowly introduced additional restrictions on abortion procedures to the point where it was ostensibly illegal more often than not.


The results of our experiment in abortion probation were objectively abysmal. In the 50’s and 60’s estimates for illegal abortions range from 200,000 to 1.2 million per year. The estimates of deaths annually from those illegal procedures is as many as 5,000 per year [1]. That makes for a Mortality of between 1:40 and 1:240. Widely high numbers for risk that women still accepted even in the face of illegality. A more recent model is found in Romania. Their experiment in outlawing abortion is almost a reverse for the United States in the time it covers. From ~1966 through 1989 abortion was made illegal. In the years of illegality, Romania’s maternal mortality rates and the number of children abandoned skyrocket [2] [3]. For those roughly 23 years, and exterminated 10,000 woman died from illegal abortions in a total population below 20 million. Calculated out that is a HIGHER mortality rate than the earlier years in the United States. This without even discussing both the non-mortality, or the incredible social impact of 60 to 100 thousand children abandoned.


The reasons to keep abortion legal and safe is self-evident. The reasons to make it illegal center entirely around moral reasoning. This is the endless circular argument. This is the nub. It pits discussions of objective moralists against subjective moralists. It pits accepted and understandable rights of body autonomy vs rights to life. It asks us to be as wise as King Soloman. Interesting enough, the solution for Soloman was to allow the woman the choice. I don’t know if Blackman and his associates on the court were thinking of Soloman when Roe Wade was decided, but I credit them with showing the same wisdom.



[1] http://www.ourbodiesourselves.org...


[2] http://www.academia.edu...


[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...

Debate Round No. 2
Arrogant

Con

I will present to the Pro how one amendment states to protect the unborn.

2) The 14th Amendment was designed to protect classes of people like the unborn.
At the time the 14th Amendment was adopted, abortion was already illegal or being made illegal throughout the nation.
The criminalization of abortion accelerated during the 1860s, and by 1900 it was generally considered a felony in every state.
Thus, there was no reason for Congress to specifically discuss the unborn in their debate on the 14th Amendment. The unborn were already a protected class in the U.S.
However, during the debate on the 14th Amendment, Senate Sponsor Jacob Howard explained that it was essential for every man (or human being) to be equal in regard to the basic right to life:
I urge the amendment for the enforcement of these essential provisions of your Constitution, divine in their justice, sublime in their humanity, which declare that all men are equal in the rights of life and liberty before the majesty of American law.
Senator Howard also stated:
It establishes equality before the law, and it gives to the humblest, the poorest, the most despised of the race the same rights and the same protection before the law as it gives to the most powerful, the most wealthy, or the most haughty..
TBR

Pro

Well, first I have a few issues starting my rebuttal round. You see, I am attempting to be understanding to con, however"

Con round 1 was completely cribbed from this site
http://www.123helpme.com...

Con round 2 was completely cribbed from this site
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com...

Con round 3 was completely cribbed from this site
https://liveactionnews.org...

For sake of decorum, I think it is best to just conclude my argument, and allow my uncontested points stand.
Debate Round No. 3
88 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by cha-the-politician 1 year ago
cha-the-politician
@TBR, @Patrickthewise.

I am sorry, my brain kind of skipped over to another debate.
Posted by bluesteel 1 year ago
bluesteel
===================================================================
>Reported vote: Dilara // Moderator action: Removed<

6 points to Pro (everything but conduct). Reasons for voting decision: I am pro life for the same reasons as con though I used to be pro choice and I understand their arguments.

[*Reason for removal*] Vote bomb based on personal bias.
==================================================================
Posted by VietTurtle 1 year ago
VietTurtle
The Other side whether plagiarized or not . The words for it still have meaning. The person in question Points posted still have merit. Just because You can out wit some one with Words or in a argument does not changes the facts. Thats not what a Debate is. Debating for the sake of debating is not a debate . While you may win the debate Vs One That not the point of the debate. The point of the debate was to Debate Both perspectives Of Abortions
Posted by noora 1 year ago
noora
It MUST be illegal! Because women who do abortion are in fact killing their babys when they are so so young (embryes)! And this is actually an unhuman behaviour!!!
How can a mom (the source of love, sympathy, mercy... etc.) became the killer of this innocent creature who can't even defend or safeguard himself????
This is unbelievable!!!!
Posted by TBR 1 year ago
TBR
As for "made up theories" I presented no theories. What exactly are you talking about?
Posted by TBR 1 year ago
TBR
@cha-the-politician - Did you happen to notice that con actually had no argument? You must remove everything that was cribbed, leaving

"I will now rebuttal and state my argument on how abortion is murder:"

and

"I will present to the Pro how one amendment states to protect the unborn."

That, as it sits, in the entirety of cons argument. It really is good you can't vote.
Posted by PatrickTheWise 1 year ago
PatrickTheWise
I'm glad you can't vote because you are so biased it isn't even funny.
Posted by cha-the-politician 1 year ago
cha-the-politician
I agreed with con before the debate because abortion is murder. After the debate I still agreed with him because con failed to change any points. Con had better conduct because he has organised points. He had no misspellings and did not use any made up theories. He also used better sources compared to Pro who used various made up things. (I can not vote)
Posted by imaparkbench 1 year ago
imaparkbench
TBR stands for The biggest retard
Posted by PatrickTheWise 1 year ago
PatrickTheWise
Can we report for plagiarism?
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by pyevchik 1 year ago
pyevchik
ArrogantTBRTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: After reading this debate, I still stand strongly against abortion. But dang man at least put it in your own words, or cite the source :/
Vote Placed by republicofdhar 1 year ago
republicofdhar
ArrogantTBRTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: Plagiarism
Vote Placed by PatrickTheWise 1 year ago
PatrickTheWise
ArrogantTBRTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Con plagiarized Arguments - Better refutations and argumentation by Pro Sources - only provided by Pro.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 1 year ago
FuzzyCatPotato
ArrogantTBRTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: play jarism
Vote Placed by Philocat 1 year ago
Philocat
ArrogantTBRTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: I'm afraid I'm going to give this one to Con, as plagiarism is not acceptable in a formal debate setting.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
ArrogantTBRTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Plagiarism. Con technically had no sources.