The Instigator
wwb371
Con (against)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
Spiral
Pro (for)
Winning
57 Points

the topic of this debate is abortion and i believe that this is wrong because ur killing humans okay

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: 5/14/2008 Category: News
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,720 times Debate No: 4036
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (29)
Votes (21)

 

wwb371

Con

my opening argument is that abortion should be illegal b/c that is basically kilng a human being okay son so see me
Spiral

Pro

Thanks for the challenge.

"my opening argument is that abortion should be illegal b/c that is basically kilng a human being okay son so see me"

First of all, my opponent must provide backing on what a human being actually is.

According to the Marriam-Webster's dictionary, a human is:

: a bipedal primate mammal (Homo sapiens: man; broadly : hominid
— hu�man�like Listen to the pronunciation of humanlike \-mən-ˌl�k\ adjective

And it defines a fetus as:

: an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind; specifically : a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth

And the definition of develop we can look at:

1 a: to go through a process of natural growth, differentiation, or evolution by successive changes b: to acquire secondary sex characteristics
_____________________________________________________
Now to argue my opponent's case.

My opponent has made an ethical argument, clear and simple. His only argument against abortion is that it is, quote, "...basically kilng a human being okay..." Ethical issues are, in the United States, brought up in court. Now my opponent has argued that abortion should be illegal, so we will discuss law in this argument. When the government passes laws that someone thinks infringes their rights, they may sue. The questions, though, that we must ask are as follows:

1. What are my basic rights?
2. By virtue of what do I have these?
3. What are the limits of these rights?
4. When may the government interfere, restrict my liberty?

We can take the Griswald vs. Connecticut Supreme Court case into consideration here. From 1879, CT had a law that made it a crime (punishable by fine or prison) to use, distribute, or advise the use of contraception. Many other states had similar laws. Estelle Griswald opened first family planning clinic in CT, advising contraceptive use, and distributing it. She was arrested. She sued on the grounds that the law was violation of the U.S. Constitution.

How was it a violation?

The court ruled, 7 to 2, that it was a violation of marital privacy. This isn't in the constitution, you say, this right to privacy. What one must realise, and what will help in my point against my opponent's abortion claim, is that there are enumerated rights and prenumbral rights. Enumerated are the ones that are explicitly mentioned in the constitution, and prenumbral are rights that implied. So, the court was claiming that marital privacy is a penumbral constitutional right implied in the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 19th amendments.
Now lets go to how Griswald could even have rights in the first place.

To have full American rights, you must first be an American citizen. To be an American citizen, you must be born in America. Griswald was an American citizen, therefore all of her rights are present, enumberated and prenumbral.

Someone who is not born in America (as we defined above, a fetus is unborn) does not possess American rights. To make something illegal in the United States, it must violate the law:

Illegal

: not according to or authorized by law : unlawful, illicit; also : not sanctioned by official rules (as of a game)
Therefore, taking a fetus' life is not technically illegal, because a fetus is not a legal U.S. citizen and therefore has no U.S. rights. A fetus, actually, is technically not a citizen of any country and has no rights at all.

A few more things my opponent should consider before his rebuttal:

1. What about a spontaneous abortion? Should we arrest women who have miscarriages? Is that manslaughter?
2. What about therapeutic abortion? Should we arrest women who have abortions preformed so they will not die during labor, have massive physical damage, or psychological damage?
3. Should we not preform abortions on a fetus that is grotesquely abnormal?
Debate Round No. 1
wwb371

Con

wwb371 forfeited this round.
Spiral

Pro

*Whistles aimlessly* Still no argument from Con. I'm guessing the rest will be forfeits as well. With nothing to rebut my arguments still stand.
Debate Round No. 2
wwb371

Con

wwb371 forfeited this round.
Spiral

Pro

Hmm. Another forfeit, oh well.

The Bat
Lewis Carroll

Twinkle, twinkle, little bat
How I wonder what you're at!
Up above the world you fly
Like a tea-tray in the sky.
Debate Round No. 3
29 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by HellKat 9 years ago
HellKat
"I'm just not sure using court cases is a good way to approach the question. The question is not asking whether or not it is legal, but whether or not it is right. By using court cases your proving its been deemed legal but not showing that it is right, or that no wrong is being done by doing it. I just think it should have been come at from a different angle that's all."

Good point, but not so much court cases as human rights according to the law is what she was using, she was using that to prove it is right because it can be considered a human right according to the constitution.
Posted by CaliBeachgirl 9 years ago
CaliBeachgirl
Good Point Kat, I'm just not sure using court cases is a good way to approach the question. The question is not asking whether or not it is legal, but whether or not it is right. By using court cases your proving its been deemed legal but not showing that it is right, or that no wrong is being done by doing it. I just think it should have been come at from a different angle that's all.
Posted by HellKat 9 years ago
HellKat
Cali, have you seen a whole lot of debates here? If you're referring to here starting off with defining a human being, it's pretty much just common sense to establish your defenitions in the debate which he did not do, that doesn't mean she likes going off topic or that she doesn't know much about the topic, it means she's trying to establish the defenitions. I'm pretty sure she would have won either way, forfeit or not.
Posted by CaliBeachgirl 9 years ago
CaliBeachgirl
Pro won the debate but thats all. Don't know much about this subject do you ya Spiral? Either that or you just liked to go WAY off topic.
Posted by faye_seventeen17 9 years ago
faye_seventeen17
LIKE DUH?

the PRO debater didn't actually substantiate his arguments. I believe that he'd better debate other JUNIOR topics though.
Posted by Ahking 9 years ago
Ahking
lol can you say overkill? ;)
Posted by SweetBags 9 years ago
SweetBags
con forfited, and seems quite the immature idiot from the comment "bet" he proposed, so i voting PRO
Posted by liberalconservative 9 years ago
liberalconservative
i believe it is wrong and a sin yet i would never limit someones freedom of choice. freedom is based off of the ideal of free will the basis of almost all religion so if you try to even add religious previews to this argument you undermine yourself
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 9 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
Self-defense is killing humans too.... therefore, if we accept the premise... :D
Posted by Bitz 9 years ago
Bitz
Yeah, it's all straight forfeits on my side.
21 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by jurist24 9 years ago
jurist24
wwb371SpiralTied
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 actualconservative 9 years ago
actualconservative
wwb371SpiralTied
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 matthewleebrown14 9 years ago
matthewleebrown14
wwb371SpiralTied
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 phsradkid09 9 years ago
phsradkid09
wwb371SpiralTied
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 thefinechina 9 years ago
thefinechina
wwb371SpiralTied
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 biophil 9 years ago
biophil
wwb371SpiralTied
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 Ahking 9 years ago
Ahking
wwb371SpiralTied
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 wwb371 9 years ago
wwb371
wwb371SpiralTied
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 Bravo453 9 years ago
Bravo453
wwb371SpiralTied
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 SweetBags 9 years ago
SweetBags
wwb371SpiralTied
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