The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Magicr
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points

if both healthy baby and endangerd mother can be saved... baby should not be allowed to be aborted

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 1 vote the winner is...
Magicr
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/13/2012 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 506 times Debate No: 24263
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

in cases where mother's life is at risk, but a later term healthy baby can be safely removed instead of aborted... and thus both mother and child saaved, this should be required. abortion should not be an option.

after six months or so of pregnancy, abortion in the US is restricted to only cases involving health of the mother. (to be sure, this includes much abuse for 'mental health' etc) if even a healthy baby MUST be aborted to save the mother, msot including me would agree it's the right thing to do. to be sure, however.... healthy babies are too often aborted in the name of saving the mother, when labor could be induced or teh baby somehow otherwise simply removed, instead of abortion.
the mother shouldn't have the option to abort a healthy baby when it can jsut be removed.
Magicr

Con

Your argument fails to acknowledge the fact that carrying a pregnancy to full term after a traumatic event such as a rape can have further traumatic psychological impact on the mother. Why should the mother be forced to suffer through this time, then have to deal with the parting of a child after that. Pregnancy is tough for a mother who is looking forward to raising her child, it is illogical to force the mother to suffer through this pain knowing that she is carrying the product of a terrible experience and will then have to see this child.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

if we're talking about a later term baby, as i said in my hypothetical, then the mother had plenty of time to abort back when the issue was more morally and legally debatable. stress the morally part.

also, just because you, and me, agree that women should be able to abort when it's a rape (only for me, i think it has to be earlier), that doesn't mean it's illogical for someone else to disagree. they simply have different values.
Magicr

Con

But what reason is there for this contention that the mother must deliver the baby? Perhaps the mother does not realize that she is pregnant until late in the pregnancy? Must she carry out this pregnancy even if she will be forced to stop working because of her pregnancy? There is no moral reason why she should carry out the pregnancy if it would cause her inconvenience. A baby is not a human being until birth.
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

dairygirl4u2c forfeited this round.
Magicr

Con

Magicr forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Doulos1202 4 years ago
Doulos1202
Only 4.7% of total abortions are associated with rape victims. Although I am with somewhat for Pro, you both need stronger arguments.

http://www.paralumun.com...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ron-Paul 4 years ago
Ron-Paul
dairygirl4u2cMagicrTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: First FF.