The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

Abortion is murder

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/1/2016 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 642 times Debate No: 93264
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




Abortion is murder. No matter what sources or comments or whatever argument you have, abortion is murder. Murder is the killing of someone purposely. A baby is a person. Some babies are born not completely formed, but they are still alive. So if you chose to have an abortion, then you are a murderer. The only reason people want it legal is because sad stupid women want to have sex, but don't want a baby. They go around sleeping with different men. God sent Jesus to heal the sick, not the clean or well. I am not claiming to be God or Christ or anything, I am just saying help the sick. If you disagree with me and think it should be legal, go right ahead and send yourself to hell. I tried to tell yo


There's two main points at issue here, one relating to fetal viability and the other to religious justification for the belief you hold, as well as several smaller points that you make, so I'll start with the smaller points.

1. "A baby is a person. Some babies are born not completely formed, but they are still alive. So if you chose to have an abortion, then you are a murderer." - The topic here is about pregnancies, not babies after birth, so I think you'll need to re-state this. The condition of a baby after its birth isn't relevant to this conversation. The conclusion "So if you chose to have an abortion, then you are a murderer" doesn't logically follow from the premises you laid out.

2. "The only reason people want it legal is because sad stupid women want to have sex, but don't want a baby. They go around sleeping with different men." - Apologies, but this is simply ignorant. There are many reasons women have abortions, including rape, or ectopic pregnancies. This claim is barely worth addressing.

3. "God sent Jesus to heal the sick, not the clean or well...I am just saying help the sick." - The implication here is that there is never a medical justification for an abortion. This is incorrect - ectopic pregnancies, as I mentioned above, are the perfect example. The pregnancy happens outside the womb, resulting in a situation where the fetus will die, and the mother's life can be put in critical danger. Is it your position that we should not terminate the fetus in this scenario, and instead let fetus and mother both die? (To clarify, in certain types of ectopic pregnancies there have been cases where the fetus has survived, but this is exceptionally rare, and in most types of ectopic pregnancies survival is impossible.)

4. "If you disagree with me and think it should be legal, go right ahead and send yourself to hell. I tried to tell yo." - This is also incorrect, as hell doesn't actually exist. The origins of hell, or 'Gehenna', can be found in the practice of burning 'the enemies of god' to death in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom (Jeremiah 7:31-32). Thus, if you don't believe in god or are an enemy of god you will 'burn forever' - indeed the idea of torment after death doesn't appear at all in the Old Testament.

So, on to abortion as murder. You appear to mean that at any point in the pregnancy it is murder, including in the first week of pregnancy. To make my argument I don't think I need to actually go too deep here unless you define your argument more clearly - all you've really put forward here is a bit of a generalized rant. Basically in order for abortion to be murder, the fetus must be a person. Obviously one day into a pregnancy we're not dealing with a person, what we have is the potential for personhood. Until the fetus is formed and can survive outside of the womb that's what it is - a potential life rather than a life. That's why we issue death certificates for stillbirths, but not for miscarriages. If a fetus in early development has no potential for life, as in the case of an ectopic pregnancy, than to terminate is not only not a murder, it is the moral and ethical thing to do as it necessarily saves the life of the mother - without termination, the mother would die in this case, as I've said, and the baby will not survive either way.

I think I've made my point that we can reliably say it is not true that *in all cases* (your position) a fetus is a person, and to terminate is murder. Logically we can say that if it is the murder of an innocent child, then it is immoral and unethical - the contrapositive statement is that if it is not immoral or unethical, it is not a murder. As we've found a case where termination is both ethical and moral, we've also found a case where termination is not murder and in fact must be legal.

Now on to the scriptural justification for your position. We actually see a good amount of evidence in the Bible that god does not consider a fetus in the womb to be the equivalent of a living, breathing person.

Genesis 2:7 - "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul."

Ezekial 37:5-6 - "Thus says the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live."

I believe there are over 100 references in the Bible to life beginning with breath (don't quote me on the exact number), but here are two clearly stated. Also important is how god demands we punish someone who kills another living, breathing human, as opposed to how we punish someone that injures a woman and leads to the end of her pregnancy.

First, Exodus 21:22 - "Whoever strikes a man so that he dies must be put to death."

Also in Exodus 21:22 - "If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage, and no harm comes to the mother: he shall surely be punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine."

This offender is not put to death, instead he must pay a fine. Clearly according to scripture there is evidence to suggest that life begins at the first breath, not at conception, and god definitively tells us that causing a woman's pregnancy to end is a less serious crime than murder.
Debate Round No. 1


The reason I was talking about babies after birth is because if a baby has not formed completely but is born and alive, then if it is in the womb and not completely formed then it is still alive. You are taking the chance away of it living it's live after birth therefore you are taking away it's life. The reason the new testament was created was to put in more laws of god. The reason Jesus came was so that if we sin, then we could be forgiven if we have accepted Christ and had admitted it. So in the old testament, people would die from breaking certain laws. Although still breaking the ten commandments is still a very bad thing. So yes at any time an abortion is murder.


First, you're generalizing from a specific and not addressing the question of pregnancies where the fetus has no ability to exist outside the womb and no shape, or even appendages, or the question of non-viable fetuses. To make your argument you need to address that as well. Second, you've made a few nice noises about Jesus and ignored the substance, actually ignored the content, of everything I said entirely as regards the scripture. You acknowledge that the 10 commandments are still relevant - why not these other injunctions I've referenced? Third, you've come to a conclusion that has very little to do with your premises.

I'll narrow it down for you I guess, and ask that you address ectopic pregnancies, as outlined in my first argument. Do you think it is immoral or unethical to terminate an ectopic pregnancy, where the fetus will not come to term and the mother will die without intervention? Do you believe in that specific scenario that abortion is murder?

Last, if you believe a fetus early into the pregnancy is a person that can be murdered, do you believe also that it's a person that commit murder? In rare cases, a twin in the womb can absorb the other twin and the result is one fetus. Is that fetus a murderer for essentially terminating the pregnancy of its twin?
Debate Round No. 2


Yes it is a murder and a person that murdered the fetus at anytime in the pregnancy. And when a man and a women mate, then they are committing themselves to the life that comes from it. Even if it meant that the mother would die. If the mother wanted an abortion to not die then that would mean that she doesn't want the baby, so she shouldn't have had sex. Taking away something that has the potential of living in the mother's womb A.K.A the baby that has not been formed yet is still murder because it has the potential of living and would have lived. The couple were selfish and rather save themselves than the baby.


You don't appear to be actually reading anything I say. A fetus in an ectopic pregnancy does not have the potential to live, the mother would die and the fetus wouldn't make it either way in this scenario. As I also said, an ectopic pregnancy occurs outside of the womb, another point you seem to have missed. So to recap...either both die or you terminate and the woman lives. This is an excruciatingly sad and emotional experience for any woman, literally the worst news a pregnant woman can get, and your comments reduce it to some kind of frivolous selfish decision. Your comment that "the couple were selfish and rather save themselves than the baby" is factually inaccurate and reveals a significant level of ignorance on this topic, as well as an unwillingness to learn new information.

If we debate again, do me the courtesy of actually reading my arguments and addressing them. For now, I'll leave it to the voters.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by 2 years ago
I'll accept if we can add a dimension to this. My argument would be that abortion is not murder (up to a point in the pregnancy - obviously aborting a week before your due date would be murder IMO, and the point I refer to is a long while before that in my mind), and that God doesn't see abortion as equivalent to murder based on scriptural evidence. Clearly your view of this is shaped by religion, so if we can put the religious justification for thinking abortion is murder on the table then I'm in.
Posted by Phenenas 2 years ago
I'd accept, because it would be the easiest thing in the world to rebuke an argument that's so obviously wrong, but I can't debate against an immature prick like this one. "If you disagree with me and think it should be legal, go right ahead and send yourself to hell." That's a real Christian thing to say, isn't it? Wishing eternal pain and torture upon anyone who disagrees with you? There are some legitimate moral arguments against abortion that I understand, but if you think being an obnoxious jerk is going to help get your point across, you're dead wrong.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Peepette 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO does not put forth clear arguments or rebuttals; just that abortion is murder due to the fetus?s status of potential life and makes religious reference to confirm. CON points out ectopic pregnancies result in death of both mother and fetus if no action is taken. CON provides Biblical quotes that affirm the contention that life begins at first breath and forceful actions resulting miscarriage is considered a lesser crime than murder. PRO asserts that the NT?s laws have relevance over the OT. This is adequately rebutted by PRO turning CON?s 10 commandment adherence as proof that the OT also is relevant. PRO?s side of the debate was more of a rant than solid points or rebuttals. Conduct tied, both were respectful, tied S&G, arguments were readable of both parties, Sources tied, neither used to affirm points.