The Instigator
nater
Con (against)
Losing
9 Points
The Contender
me_a
Pro (for)
Winning
33 Points

that the united states should not value abortion it is wrong and selfish

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/15/2008 Category: Health
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,850 times Debate No: 3642
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (22)
Votes (14)

 

nater

Con

why are we letting all these innocent children die. The government should not highly value abortion. Killing babies is wrong as well as sex before marriage. I stand resolve that instead of abortion that we need to think of adoption so that a baby can have a mom and dad. If you cannot handle a baby because you are not able too than think of the baby instead of yourself. People tend to forget that what if our parents believed in killing us instead of keeping us or at least putting us up for adoption. It is so hard in life to go on without a dad.
me_a

Pro

As a point of clarification, my opponent seems to be the pro in relation to the topic; therefore, I am the con. But they must have been confused when picking sides, so for voting purposes only, I am "pro" and my opponent is "con."

I'd like to start with the issue of constitutionality.
First, the constitution gives rights to the people. The ninth amendment states, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
The constitution certainly does not give the government the power to force women to have children. Therefore, the right to have an abortion belongs to the people. However, many pro-life activists call abortion "murder," which is, indeed, quite illegal, as it infringes upon another citizens rights, like living. However, to be "murdered" something must be alive.
The right to decide whether a fetus is, in fact, alive belongs to the states. For example, abortion is legal in California because the state's judicial system ruled that a fetus was not alive until a certain stage of pregnancy. The tenth amendment states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."
Not only does this amendment give the states the power to allow abortion if they decide that a fetus is not alive by law, it gives further power to the people.
My opponent also decided to throw in a nice little snippet rather unrelated to the debate at hand, saying, "Killing babies is wrong, as well as sex before marriage." Yes, killing babies is wrong, because the said babies are alive. However, in many states, fetuses are not considered to be living; therefore, abortion is not murder. As for the sex before marriage, well, I'd like to see the government try to regulate that. Big Brother anyone?

My opponent states that we must consider adoption before abortion; however, they seem to have ignored the constitution, and the fact that adoption is still an available and encouraged process.

Abortion is not an argument of morality, it is an argument of legality. Hence the separation of church and state.
My opponent has obviously integrated personal emotional bias into their argument. They ask us all to consider what would have happened if our parents had had us aborted. This was not only inflammatory, it was illogical. If our parents had had us aborted, we wouldn't be here and therefore wouldn't care. Besides, this argument is not relevant. It is not based on fact at all, nor are any of my opponents arguments.

My opponent also states that it is so hard in life to go on without a dad. Yes, it is. And the majority of women having abortions are single, meaning those fetuses would not have fathers. Apparently, my opponent wants to protect children from living a cold, fatherless existence; there is no other permanent way to protect them from this than abortion.

Bottom line- abortion is a matter of the states. My opponent says that the entire country should not value it. The United States government as a whole has no power over matters of the state. Not only are their arguments purely emotional, bias, illogical, and not supported by fact, they are unconstitutional. The constitution, my friends, is something the United States should value.
Debate Round No. 1
nater

Con

nater forfeited this round.
me_a

Pro

Perhaps my opponent was intimidated by all of that constitution mumbo gumbo. That or they have other things to do than indulge in online debate. Either way, I suppose I "win." And I guess I'll keep this going so it will count as a "win." Public education has taught me that only scores matter.
Debate Round No. 2
nater

Con

Yes she is right of the amendment, and yes we wouldn't be alive to live in the world, but still it may be legal, but is it the right thing to do. We forget so many times that the amendment was written as guide lines and not laws.
My oppenent is also correct when she sais it's not murder because the baby wasn't born. However, Why not give the baby a chance to live father, mother or not.
my oppenent also said I interigated bias people. Well i have not in fact this is all me. One of my cousins has a baby and father, but she decided to keep the baby instead of abortion. Adoption and abortion both cost money why don't we do what is right for the child and not what the parents want. Yes the amendment gives us the right, but it is more guidlines instead of laws
me_a

Pro

I'm not entirely sure what my opponent is trying to convey. I believe they're trying to say that the constitution only consists of guidlines; though this may be true, we can not completely disregard the amendments, particularly those that give rights to the individuals and to the states. The constitution gives states the right to determine whether or not abortion is legal within their state. This is a right that can not be taken away. It is not simply a guideline. It gives states the powers to make the laws.
My opponents arguments are all emotional. "Why not give the baby a chance to live..." That statement has no logical, or legal backing.
And as a point of clarification, I did not say that my opponent had integrated bias people, but that they were bias themselves.
My opponent stated that adoption and abortion both cost money; however, the choice is not about finance. It is about what the parents want to do and whether the state courts have decided if it is legal.
It is the duty of the American government to follow the "guidelines" established by the constitution and allow that states to decide whether or not abortion is legal.
Debate Round No. 3
22 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Issa 9 years ago
Issa
sure thing im here to help =)
Posted by HellKat 9 years ago
HellKat
There are Christians in those countries as far as I know.
Posted by nater 9 years ago
nater
there their to do both, anyways thats true, but are you talking when the spartans were around or just in gerneral. And besides you don't just have to obey all the ten commandments to enter Heaven the main thing is to axcept Christ. Now that would be hard if they had never had heard of it. But look at it this way when you are in Heaven there are no sins, no crying, no sadness, nothing negative and to tell you the truth everyone comes face to face with God. And weren't the first humans Adam and Eve and everyone after them knew of God somehow, but thanks to sin nature not everyoe accetps it
Posted by brian_eggleston 9 years ago
brian_eggleston
Hello nater.

I didn't know that US troops were handing out Bibles in Iraq. I thought they were there to liberate the Iraqi people, not convert them!

Okay, even if I accept that God does exist and he doesn't discriminate against non-Christians, what about the humans that were born before Christianity (or it's predecessor, Judaism) were formed?

They would never have had the opportunity to become Christians so God would have to have let them into heaven. This means that Christians have to share heaven with heathens from thousands of years ago who may have broken every one of the Ten Commandments because nobody told them what they were doing was sinful.

Rebut that one if you can! In the meantime, it's nearly quarter to seven in the evening here in London and I'm off to the pub, so I apologise in advance if I don't reply to your post!
Posted by nater 9 years ago
nater
hey brian, Do you agree with that God gives equal opportunity. Look as your statement "God is racist" Why is God racist if he is loving, caring, and wants what's best for us.
Posted by nater 9 years ago
nater
ok, but doesn't God give equal opportunity. Like i said If a baby isn't born or it is born but dies at a young age shouldn't it be allowed to go to Heaven. Look actually our troops imploied in iraq are bringing bibles to the people there. isn't that at least doing something worth while
Posted by brian_eggleston 9 years ago
brian_eggleston
As you will have observed, the "God is a Racist" debate is supposed to be humorous, but there are many true words said in jest.

I didn't, of course, mean that God actually discriminates against non-whites, just that it would be very unfair if he (supposing he exists) didn't accept people of other faiths, or no faith at all into Heaven.

After all there's no more chance of someone in Saudi Arabia converting to Christianity than there is of you converting to Islam - your religion usually depends on where you were born and bred.
Posted by nater 9 years ago
nater
Hey Brian check out my comment give me feedback
Posted by brian_eggleston 9 years ago
brian_eggleston
Nater, you should check out another debate of mine: "God is a Racist" and help out with some comments!
Posted by nater 9 years ago
nater
so are you saying i was wrong to say that. Was i wrong to bring in Christ to this
14 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by SteamPunk 9 years ago
SteamPunk
naterme_aTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by bexy_kelly 9 years ago
bexy_kelly
naterme_aTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by livi 9 years ago
livi
naterme_aTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by nater 9 years ago
nater
naterme_aTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by attrition 9 years ago
attrition
naterme_aTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by tigersandgreenweather 9 years ago
tigersandgreenweather
naterme_aTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by dave23456 9 years ago
dave23456
naterme_aTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by WeaponE 9 years ago
WeaponE
naterme_aTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by HellKat 9 years ago
HellKat
naterme_aTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by jmanstar 9 years ago
jmanstar
naterme_aTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03