The Instigator
noorfatima636
Con (against)
The Contender
spinster
Pro (for)

abortion

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
noorfatima636 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/13/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 480 times Debate No: 95384
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (37)
Votes (0)

 

noorfatima636

Con

why is it wrong to have an abort?
spinster

Pro

Just double checking you know you are con. Anyone should be allowed to have an abortion if the do so wish as it is their body, their choice. Being told you have to have a child is just plain wrong. Rape? Teenage pregnancy? Don't want children? Then don't have them. Will the child really be loved if they are an 'accident'? If you aren't ready for a child and see all your friends having fun could you possibly grow to resent the baby stopping them from living?
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
37 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by BackCommander 2 months ago
BackCommander
"So tell me where this lump of cells is considered an expendable inconvenience?" The moment it starts to form, it is expendable. As you raise your child, you're able to decide it is inconvenient and simply give it up for adoption, that's really all I need to say to point out that children are inconvenient.

People like you annoy me to no end. You say other people are grasping at straws, or succumbing to fallacies, or are being ridiculous, when everyone can easily see that you're simply describing yourself. "Some quick facts for you" followed by a list of irrelevant points doesn't help your cause.
Posted by BackCommander 2 months ago
BackCommander
Look, people like you say the word "right" as if it's magic. All I did was point out that you can claim all the rights you want, they don't matter, they're just words.

Btw, it isn't grasping at staws when YOU literally use the words "all life." Don't just spit out words and then get upset when someone follows them to their resolution.

You do know that the right to life amounts to absolutely nothing, right? My whole point is that rights are just to put you at ease, they don't matter. For instance, if you're put on trial for killing a man and even though you're innocent, end up being sentenced to death because your lawyer didn't do well to defend you, believing you have the right to not be killed will not change anything. You're attempting to use the fact that a piece of paper says you have the right to life as an argument against someone who understands that that has no relevancy in 90% of the situations an average american finds themselves in.

"A healthy society doesn't use a process like abortion as a method to engage in irresponsible sex" Many societies do. We're adults, which means that we've long outgrown the term "irresponsible sex." People like you need to stop telling people what to do with their genitals. Having children just because you happened to get pregnant, isn't what a healthy society does, that simply leads to overpopulation and an increase in the consumption of resources.

Claiming that my arguments are getting ridiculous, when yours has been that way from the start, hilarious.

"that is a pretty amazing lump of cells" 24 weeks is the average cutoff for abortions for that exact reason, up until that point describing them as a lump of cells is pretty accurate. As far as every other point you make, nearly all abortions are done in the first trimester. Statistically speaking abortions after the first thirteen weeks are pretty rare. Did you look into that at all? Or are you simply spouting as many pleas to emotion as possible regardless of
Posted by WhoIsJohnGalt 2 months ago
WhoIsJohnGalt
Some quick facts for you
A baby can live outside of the womb as young as 24 weeks, that is a pretty amazing lump of cells. Now with recent medical advancement, 22 week old babies are suriving outside of the womb successfully.
There are states that allow abortion after the 24 week period.
At 13 weeks they are nearly anatomically complete with a heartbeat and functioning organs. The same description can be given to adults on life support, should we be able to legally kill them too?
After the second trimester the baby is fully formed and can start surviving with medical help outside of the womb.

So tell me where this lump of cells is considered an expendable inconvenience?
Posted by WhoIsJohnGalt 2 months ago
WhoIsJohnGalt
@backcommander, "We cannot apply that universally to all life because it isn't true." Errr Duhhhh, oh boy, did you really bring animals into the conversation? You are grasping at straws there buddy. Who in the world would take that illogical leap given the context of the conversation?

"You say "right to live" like it's a thing. If my neighbor decides to come over here and shoot me in the head, no imaginary right is going to stop him"
Did you think someone was saying a right will become an invisible, real life protector like Batman? No kidding it won't stop anybody because humans have free will. However there is still a consequence, and that is something that can't be stopped. That consequence is determined by a right. Whether it is viewed is innate or derived from law, US citizens currently have a right to life. You do know that right?

" Yes, a lump of cells that could, and probably will, someday become a baby? No, not human,"
A baby is a lump of cells? You have a very elementary understanding of the stages of a fetus. Start with Wikipedia and go from there, get some facts on what happens at each stage of life and compare it with abortion limits.

Your arguments are getting more and more outlandish and ridiculous.

A healthy society doesn't use a process like abortion as a method to engage in irresponsible sex,.
Posted by cwt002 2 months ago
cwt002
Killing can be merciful, to who in this situation? Definitely not the baby? Are you calling pregnancy torture? Also, you make it come across, that death or killing is good, positive, and celebratory.

"Are you honestly going to tell a woman that she must undergo 9 months of hardship, excruciating pain and live with the consequences, as the fetus is more important than her?"

I think we have to first ask is the life important? I think yes, you think the importance and value are decided by one person or is subjective. Also, person, probably full of emotions, fear, irrational thinking, and flooded with hormones can make a decision, that impacts not only her life but another as well. I mean there is a point where responsibility for actions comes into play. There is always risk everyone knows that there is a possibility of becoming pregnant when having sex and when that happens responsibility comes into play. But, abortion says there is an easy fix, you can deflect responsibility for your actions, and do not let this child be an inconvenience to your life. In other words, allow death so you can live the life you want. I am not telling a woman that she must go through 9 months of hardships, excruciating pain, and live with consequences but that her actions led to this situation. She knew the possibilities when having sex. Also, the consequences are her choice, she can wallow in negativity and resentment towards a child birthed from her actions or allow the child to bring joy to herself or an adoptive parent.

NOTE: I am not referring to situations of rape because 99% of abortions occur from pregnancy resulting from consensual sex.

The fact is, that my wife and I talked about this before she was pregnant but I recently asked her again about the next child and she said the same thing. The point is not that we believe the child is more important than us (although we do), it is that we believe the child is important, period.
Posted by BackCommander 2 months ago
BackCommander
@cwt002 killing can be merciful, can it not? Yet to cause pain and deformation is more easily compared to torture. The point is that death isn't cruel, torture is. You also failed to answer Spinster's question, I'll repost it for you.

"Are you honestly going to tell a woman that she must undergo 9 months of hardship, excruciating pain and live with the consequences, as thefoetus is more important than her?" Your wife may have told you to save your child instead of her, but she was also flooded with so many hormones at the time that if she had said anything but that it would have been scientifically impressive. I'd like to see the binding legal contract that can hold up in court when it's stated that it was signed by a woman who was in labor. Point is, every mother on the planet can agree that their child is more important than they are, but that doesn't mean that they're right, or that the opinion of someone who doesn't want a child is any less important.
Posted by BackCommander 2 months ago
BackCommander
@WhosIsJohnGalt "Rights end where others begin" says who?

But seriously, my previous comment is perfectly logical.

"A baby, regardless of where it is living, is a defenseless human with a right to life, to terminate its life is a violation of its right to live and it is murder." A baby? Yes, a lump of cells that could, and probably will, someday become a baby? No, not human, lump of cells. You say "right to live" like its a thing. If my neighbor decides to come over here and shoot me in the head, no imaginary right is going to stop him. If he then goes to court and gets the death penalty, they won't undo it because someone thinks he has a right to life. Murder is defined as "killing illegally" and abortion is legal, therefore it isn't murder.

We cannot apply that universally to all life because it isn't true. If it were lion wouldn't eat gazelle, fish wouldn't eat their young, and apes wouldn't kill each other just because they were in each other's space. Life is not precious and nature makes that very apparent. The fact of the matter is that abortion is legal, and there are laws in place to ensure no one is allowed to make it illegal. That's something you should just come to terms with right now.
Posted by cwt002 2 months ago
cwt002
I completely understand that we are allowed to disagree but I am just trying to understand your point of view and present my opposing side. Again, it just seems inconsistent to say you can terminate the life but on the other hand, you cannot hurt the individual physically or emotionally. Also, I think that life, goals, and plans change due to our circumstances. When a woman becomes pregnant 99% of the time it is due to her engaging in consensual sex.

Now the issue of rape is a very emotional argument. But, I believe that there is a child, a life in the womb, and the issue of the source of pregnancy and value of a life are completely different. This is not a favorable way of looking at the issue but it is true. Also, rape covers less than 1% of abortions so keep this in mind when discussing it. We can go back to the main use for abortion which is due to convenience. Finally, I do not think that rapist should not have any rights or connection to the child or mother. In fact, I believe in severe punishment for the individual that is a rapist.

The only circumstance that I personally believe is truly justifiable is when the mother will die during the pregnancy. This is not to say that the mother is more important but that a decision must be made as to what will happen in the situation. When my wife and I had our child, my wife said if anything happens and you must make a call to save our daughter or me, choose her.

I will also say that if I was a decision maker in Washington and they said let's outlaw all abortion except for cases of rape, incest, and when the mother would die. I would accept it immediately because the number of abortions would decrease significantly.
Posted by spinster 2 months ago
spinster
My point is, abortion should be legal. People are allowed to disagree with that, you can disagree with anything, but not the the extent that is hurts the individual, physically or emotionally. Are you honestly going to tell a woman that she must undergo 9 months of hardship, excruciating pain and live with the consequences, as thefoetus is more important than her? Also I would like to inquire about your views. Do you agree with abortion of rapists children, when in 31 states a rapists can sue and gain custody/ visitation rights on the child. Or are you against all abortion?
Posted by cwt002 2 months ago
cwt002
That is the point I was making: your position is that it is the woman's body and she can choose but now the woman cannot choose in this instance. One will terminate the life and one will possibly hurt the life and it is wrong to possibly hurt and right to terminate.

Also, even when anything is illegal it still happens. Murder is illegal, rape is illegal, and theft is illegal but it all still occurs. When something is illegal it will always continue to occur but at the same time, it serves as a deterrent. If people willfully break a law and hurt themselves in the process, their injuries are due to their irresponsible and illegal behavior. Not implementing a law on the basis of the consequences one endures by willfully breaking that law makes no sense.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.