The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
mfelton
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

if both mother and baby can be saved when mom's life is at risk... abortion should not be allowed

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: 5/28/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 398 times Debate No: 55637
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

in cases where mother's life is at risk, but the 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, 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.
mfelton

Con

The ethicality of abortion frankly depends on the situation. In your particular situation, it would at first seem unethical to abort the baby if both lives can be saved. However, what it the baby was born into a terrible home situation? What if the baby's dad was an alcoholic and the baby's mom was not much better? Sometimes life is just not worth living. Also, what if the baby was conceives under a tragic circumstance such as rape? Of course there are women who only abort out of convenience. However, it is unfair to only permit certain people to abort and not others. Everyone must obey the same law.

If a mother were forced to give birth to her unwanted baby, she would clearly still not want the baby. The baby would probably be treated by his mother differently. He might grow up in an unloving environment and be ostracized from day one. In another scenario, the extra mouth to feed can cause the family to grow more impoverished.

Overall, abortion should be legal, even if both mother and child can be saved.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

you concede that if both can survive then it would 'seem' immoral to kill the baby.

an issue you take is that the baby may grow into a bad home environment. why not extend your logic to newborns? the baby must be given rights at some point, why not viability, the point it can survive? you seem to think the birth canal is the magical point, but it's a lot more arbitrary cause for effective purposes the baby can survive and all you are providing is trivial location points.

perhaps the mother can give it up for adoption. there are plenty willing to adopt. in any case, ask anyone if they'd rather be born into rough conditions or die, and you see it's clear we should give preference to letting it live. the mother's say in it is diminished greatly due to the viability of the baby.

as for rape, the mother had plenty of time to abort earlier, if it's to the point of viability. she has no legitimate claims to abort the baby if it can just be removed, given her hindrance isn't really an issue. even with rape, a point must be made to give the fetus rights, and viability seems legit.

you are basically advocating legalized murder.
mfelton

Con

mfelton forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

reiterate
mfelton

Con

mfelton forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.