The Big One - Pro or Anti Choice for Abortion...
Debate Rounds (3)
Swearing and stuff like that are allowed, you can attack my atheism all you want, but remember, words spent fudging my views could be spent throwing your own.
I believe that a woman should have the right to abort an embryo or foetus before it is born.
I am looking for a moral argument, so any religious beliefs chucked into the debate pile should remain unconsidered by the reader. Regardless of their religion.
No arguments in the first round, simply state your belief and wait...
Part 1 - Biological Argument
Tell me, what is the baby until around a month before it is born? It is a sack of bones and flesh, still connected to the mother and completely part of the woman's body, in the month leading up to the pregnancy, abortion may kill or severely harm the mother, so there is a practical reason for that being the point of no return.
Part 2 - The Philosophical Argument
What is life? Really, what is it but a tool of itself to prolong its own existence. The religious attitude to life shows that it is a mere plaything of god, a toy for the great entity to play with or destroy according to he/she/it's designs. A product of an experiment.
Part 3 - The Evolutionary Argument
It is undeniable that in the evolutionary context, the ending of one single life from a bloodline isn't going to result in the demise of that branch of the species, the woman can always have another child when she is ready.
The heart begins to beat at 21-days and brainwaves are detectable at 40-days gestation.
So, my opponent asks what the fetus is until just prior to birth? Answer: A Human Being. A human being with just as much right to live as you or I.
Big Picture Argument
Lets just place a scenario down now: imagine a woman in her 20s, unemployment has hit hard, and she is unable to get a job because she is busy caring for her child. One afternoon, she returns home to a wrecked house.
Upon climbing the stairs, she is attacked by an intruder, who remained in the house. Eventually the police arrive, and she is sent to the psychiatrist to be treated for the trauma, a couple of days later, she admits that the intruder raped her, and she is worried for her health, she heads to the hospital, soon finding out that she is pregnant.
If this woman allowed the child to be born, she would be left in a position where her entire life is in shreds, her family told her that they wouldn't be able to cope with another child.
She has barely enough money to sustain herself and a child. A future of suffering, or the possibility of another child when the time is right. From "death" comes new life.
"Okay, so you didn't make your own argument, brilliant."
I used sources to support my contention. That doesn't mean I am not making a contention.
My opponent, as usual with "pro-choicers" ends the debate with the case of rape. Does the fact that the mother is the victim of an atrcious crime make the child less human? Furthermore, abortions because of rape make up less than 1% off all abortions in the United States, according to the Allen Guttmacher Institute (the research arm of Planned Parenthood).
My opponent offered no counter to my argument for the humanity of the preborn, supported by expert testimony. So the only question the voter has left to ponder is the morality of killing a human being.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by NiqashMotawadi3 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was impressive in the first rounds but then completely avoided Con's weak arguments on how life starts at conception and that one about brain waves, when both don't indicate that a human being is there or that it has consciousness to begin with. Hence, Con was actually slightly better at arguments because Pro ignored two major arguments he brought forth, even though this was a disappointing debate due to what seemed like a tight word-restriction and lack of good arguments and substantial content. Both debaters had terrible conduct. So I'm not going to give anyone the conduct point.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.