The Instigator
155401didio
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Taylur
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

abortion

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/19/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 431 times Debate No: 46274
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

155401didio

Con

Now im not trying to offend anybody, but i want to know where women got this so called right of abortion. I agree if it is rape but if a girl is irresponsible and gets pregnant because she is going around sleeping with every guy, then she does not have that right.
Taylur

Pro

I'm not even going to mention the sexism surrounding this argument as I find there are more important aspects to discuss.

The gist of your argument is that promiscuous women should be left to deal with the consequences of having sex. You claim that rape victims can have abortions because the pregnancy is not their fault, whereas consensual sex resulting in an accidental pregnancy is not a viable reason for an abortion. In essence, you want promiscuous women to be 'punished' with a child if they happen to become pregnant. Correct?

Now, what about that innocent child? The child is going to be born into the world with a mother that never wanted them -- a mother that may even despise them. If the woman is as promiscuous as your initial argument makes out, she may end up giving birth to many kids that she never wanted; many kids that are neglected and raised in an environment of regret -- a home completely void of love.

Personally, I think abortions of unwanted pregnancies are beneficial to both the woman and child. There is no guarantee that the woman will stop sleeping around and become a wonderful mother after giving birth.

You may argue that aborting a life is equally as cruel as birthing them in an unsavoury environment, but I strongly believe that an early abortion is not morally wrong in any sense because the embryo has not developed a brain or nervous system to think about or even feel what is happening. In fact, many pregnancies are naturally miscarried within the first few months.

The only other argument I can foresee you mentioning is that the child could be given up for adoption directly after being born to a mother that doesn't care. Although this would be great news to thousands of adoptive parents, I can't see it being a straight forward procedure. For instance, the mother is likely to continue drinking, smoking and engaging in other harmful activities while the child develops because she will not care for the health of a child that she will never raise. She may even be spiteful that she is being forced into carrying an unwanted child for 9 months. It would cause the mother and child undue stress.

Forget about the woman's right to abortion -- think about the child's right to be born into a loving family. If the child isn't going to be loved, and the mother is trying to stop the pregnancy, why would any compassionate person want to force the child into life? This may sound harsh to you, but you must remember that an embryo has no cognitive ability, awareness or feelings. An embryo is not a human life, it is a potential for human life, and if that potential is a saddening one, we should not force them to experience it.

Birth would be cruel in this scenario.
Debate Round No. 1
155401didio

Con

"She may even be spiteful that she is being forced into carrying an unwanted child for 9 months. It would cause the mother and child undue stress." Anyone who has sex knows the consequences of it and if its not with the person that they love and they do it anyway that's their fault. She knew that there was a possibility of getting pregnant, but she obviously didn't care. If someone does something that can result in a consequence, and they are not willing to face the consequence then that person is a coward. with a rape victim it is not her fault, but if a girl is sleeping with every guy in school and she knows the consequences, but doesn't care and gets pregnant she should have to deal with the consequence. For example, if a person goes and kills a man he has to face a consequence. He will either be executed, or put in jail he is being held responsible for his actions.

"Now, what about that innocent child? The child is going to be born into the world with a mother that never wanted them -- a mother that may even despise them." She can just give it up for adoption, at least the child lives . "You may argue that aborting a life is equally as cruel as birthing them in an unsavoury environment, but I strongly believe that an early abortion is not morally wrong in any sense because the embryo has not developed a brain or nervous system to think about or even feel what is happening. In fact, many pregnancies are naturally miscarried within the first few months." Even if the embryo hasn't formed and it cant think so what you are still preventing it from having a life.
Taylur

Pro

I answered the entire premise of of your argument in the first round.

I understand that you want promiscuous women to be 'punished' with a child if they happen to become pregnant, but it is simply not fair for the child. You are promoting the child as a consequence for the woman rather than a son or daughter that the woman would love unconditionally -- you want to force it upon the mother, and that is unfair on THE CHILD, because the mother will be unlikely to offer any sincere affection. You're answer to this is adoption, which I have already rejected as a viable option:

[[Although this would be great news to thousands of adoptive parents, I can't see it being a straight forward procedure. For instance, the mother is likely to continue drinking, smoking and engaging in other harmful activities while the child develops because she will not care for the health of a child that she will never raise.]]

The child would potentially be unsafe developing in the womb of a spiteful mother. The activities that I mentioned above (from round 1) could lead to irreversible issues in the child's health.

And finally, you said: "Even if the embryo hasn't formed and it cant think so what you are still preventing it from having a life."

I have already stated that the life of the child would be a horrible experience in the care of a mother that never wanted them, but I refuse to accept your point as anything more than a bad attempt at a counter argument, because you mentioned in round one that abortions are fine in the event of rape. If this were the case, why should any child "have its life taken away"? The embryo is innocent regardless of how it was achieved. If you can understand that abortions are spiritually moral after rape, you should easily understand that abortions are also spiritually moral after accidental pregnancy. Spiritualism has no place in this debate as you have already approved abortion in certain scenarios.
Debate Round No. 2
155401didio

Con

"I understand that you want promiscuous women to be 'punished' with a child if they happen to become pregnant, but it is simply not fair for the child" It isn't necessarily a punishment, it is the its just simply what happens when you have sex if she doesn't want a child she shouldn't have sex PERIOD. And then you say that it is not fair for the child to be put in a home where a mother doesn't want it, this is funny so by that logic you are saying that it is fair that we kill it? I have already told you that if she doesn't want the thing she can just give it up for adoption but apparently don't think that is a viable option. "[[Although this would be great news to thousands of adoptive parents, I can't see it being a straight forward procedure. For instance, the mother is likely to continue drinking, smoking and engaging in other harmful activities while the child develops because she will not care for the health of a child that she will never raise.]]" who said that the mother did any of those things you are just making assumptions. and even if she doesn't care about it, at least it lives my mom was born into a home where she wasn't wanted she was abused and yeah sure it had a negative effect on her but she said that it also helped her become a stronger person and she definitely would not want to be aborted. even if the child had a rough childhood so what that's only a small portion of his/her life. But you are also missing one of my main points she knew the consequences of sex but she didn't care she should be held responsible for her actions.
Taylur

Pro

"its just simply what happens when you have sex if she doesn't want a child she shouldn't have sex PERIOD" -- I disagree completely. Sex is just sex. Why aren't the males being scorned for having sex with the woman? Double standards are not acceptable.

You then claim that killing the child is not fairer than letting it be born into a family that doesn't love it, which I have already explained in round 1 AND 2. Killing the embryo cannot even be considering murder because the brain or nervous system hasn't be developed in the early stages, and you have already agreed that abortion after rape is acceptable, so you must not have any strong feelings on killing embryos at all. I would find it more tragic for a child to be born and then abused than never born at all -- every single sperm and every single period is a tragic and wasted life, by your logic.

And yes, I reiterate once again that adoption is not a viable option. I am presuming that the mother will not treat the child nice because she is desperate for an abortion -- why would anyone who wants an abortion also want to care for the child? If she did indeed want to care for the child, she would not desperately want the abortion in the first place. I am indeed taking a worst case scenario approach, but it's only realistic to do so.

I'm glad your mum grew stronger from her childhood abuse and that she didn't want to be aborted, but you miss the point that an aborted embryo would never develop feelings or regrets. It would never become a mum. It would never experience life, and that is neither bad or good for the embryo -- the embryo doesn't have a brain.

And back to the original point again. Yes, the woman knew the consequences, but at the end of the day, sex is fun. Men and women enjoy it. Why aren't the men being criticised for sleeping around? Also, you yourself are making the assumption that the women did not try to avoid pregnancy via contraception -- mistakes happen, even when taking precautions.
Debate Round No. 3
155401didio

Con

"Why aren't the males being scorned for having sex with the woman? Double standards are not acceptable." because men dont have to worry about getting pregnant and im not saying its not the males fault either in fact its equal but if a girl gets an abortion than its not holding anybody responsible. and you say that it cant be consider killing since it hasn't developed its organs, so what you are still preventing it from having a life, so you are taking its life and in that matter it is murder. And the only reason i say its ok with rape is because it is not the woman's fault, but when its consensual sex it is the woman's fault. "every single sperm and every single period is a tragic and wasted life, by your logic." you are missing my main point if a guy jacks off in his room there is no possible way he is gonna get a girl pregnant. but if he had sex he knows the risks but doesn't care and if he gets a girl pregnant(and since you don't think that adoption is good) they BOTH should be held responsible.

"I'm glad your mum grew stronger from her childhood abuse and that she didn't want to be aborted, but you miss the point that an aborted embryo would never develop feelings or regrets. It would never become a mum. It would never experience life, and that is neither bad or good for the embryo -- the embryo doesn't have a brain." It doesn't matter whether it has feelings or not its still wrong to take its life.

"And back to the original point again. Yes, the woman knew the consequences, but at the end of the day, sex is fun. Men and women enjoy it. Why aren't the men being criticised for sleeping around? Also, you yourself are making the assumption that the women did not try to avoid pregnancy via contraception -- mistakes happen, even when taking precautions." If they know the consequence and don't care they should be held responsible period. And im not saying that they are not trying to prevent it. but i want to get back to my main point, and that is if they have sex knowing the possible consequences(whether they try to prevent it or not) they should be held responsible PERIOD. im not sexist i just don't think its right
Taylur

Pro

The premise of your entire argument has bubbled down to the morality of terminating an embryo. You claim it is taking a life. I have already mentioned that every single sperm and period is as much of a wasted life than an early embryo; neither of them contain a nervous system or brain -- neither of them feel pain or have emotions and consciousness. What, then, is the issue of aborting an early embryo? A sperm cell fusing with an egg does not magically create life, it is only the potential for life to begin, and as I mentioned in a previous round, many miscarriages happen during early pregnancy anyway -- it's a very natural occurrence. [1]

I concede that repetitive abortions over and over would feel wrong on a moral level, but I direct you back to my original argument: if any woman had the ability to sleep around without protection and solve it with an abortion every time, she does not have the right to care for a child at all. She may give it to the father, but why should he have the burden if he does not want the child either? Adoption is the last resort (I've already explained the downfalls of this), but I still feel that a forced pregnancy will do no good for anyone -- sure, the child will experience life, but life only appears to be good to us because we ARE alive; an embryo, a sperm or an egg has no desire to be born. They are lifeless cells. They have no regrets.

Thank you for this thorough debate.

[1] - http://www.nlm.nih.gov...
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by 2Sense 2 years ago
2Sense
Instead of Con taking the traditional sexist route by criticizing the woman's sexual activity, he should instead focus on both players who cause the pregnancy. The woman can have sex if she wants to, just as a man can. But both should be held accountable, not just her. Perhaps the man should stop sleeping around, or perhaps he should wear a condom next time. Vilifying either gender for this topic is highly unfair and speaks volumes of the Con's already set in place views about gender roles and sex, which really, should have no place in this debate to begin with.
No votes have been placed for this debate.