The Instigator
Swim1216
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Kelisitaan
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Abortion is wrong

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 2 votes the winner is...
Kelisitaan
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/26/2016 Category: Health
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 678 times Debate No: 98461
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

Swim1216

Pro

Abortion is not okay. It kills babies who haven't done anything wrong. Kills babies who haven't even done anything. Killing innocent life isn't right. It's wrong.
Kelisitaan

Con

Abortion is not killing innocent life. Rather, it's letting a woman control her own body. Abortion is accepted because a woman has the right to choose what she wants to do with her body.

The fetus needs the body of the mother to survive. If human A needs a part of human B to survive, e.g. a kidney transplant, it is entirely up to human B whether or not he wants to give human A a kidney. Even if human B is dying and his kidneys will rot with him, he decides what to do with his own body. Even if human A's life is at stake and human B's life is already over, with rotting kidney's, it's still human B's right to choose what to do with his dead body.

Is this considered murder? No, of course it's not. Is it a little douchey? Perhaps. Is it acceptable? Yes, a person has the right to do whatever he wants with his body.

If the fetus can survive on its own, then abortion is more of an up in the air debate. However, if the fetus needs the mother's body (which it does), abortion comes down to the simple principal of a woman has the right to choose what she wants to do with her body.

By letting the fetus control a woman's body, you are granting a fetus rights to someone else's body. No one has rights to anyone's body but that person. Period

A fetus needs a mother's body to survive. If the mother does not want to let the fetus use her body, it doesn't have to. The fetus is a part of a parasitic relationship; although its body is affected, it's using the body of the mother to survive.
Debate Round No. 1
Swim1216

Pro

I hope you know I'm only 13 so yeah but abortion is killing which defies the word of God. Another thing every person has a right and life begins at conception so unborn babies are human being with right to life. Women should not be able to use abortion as a form of contraception. Woman choose to have sex so they need to take responsibility for their actions. Unborn babies shouldn't be punished for a mistake made by adults.
Kelisitaan

Con

Abortion is not killing. Is it killing to not let a man dying of thirst use your water? No. Is it killing to not let a man dying from kidney failure use your kidney? No. Is it killing to not let a fetus use its mother's body against her will? No.

These may be cruel, unkind, tragic, etc., but none of them are killing.

Life certainly does begin at conception; however, that is irrelevant. The man dying of thirst and the human needing a kidney are also alive, and it's not murder to not help them.

If you drive down the street, get into a fatal car accident, should you just "take responsibility for your actions" and not go to the hospital? After all, you knew the risks of driving, yet you still did it. No, of course not. Just because someone receives a bad consequence, e.g. an unwanted baby, doesn't mean they need to go through with it.

As for life being unfair for the fetus, yes, I agree. Welcome to life. It's very unfair. However, what would be even MORE unfair would be forcing the mother to use its body to protect a life that's not even a human, nor entitled to use the body of someone else.
Debate Round No. 2
Swim1216

Pro

I'm just going to say you win cause I barely know anything about this and I tired and lazy and really don't feel like lookin up facts and I'm still going to believe what I still do because it defies God and killing life isn't right but whatever to the debate not abortion
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Matpat// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: read my past abortion arguments

[*Reason for removal*] Not an RFD. Stating that the debaters should read your previous debates on this topic is not only a non-sequitor, but it clearly imposes the voter"s views on the topic on the debate. That kind of bias alone would make this vote insufficient.
************************************************************************
Posted by cwt002 1 year ago
cwt002
The difference in the kidney scenario, that the dying man or at least someone would be asking the woman for her kidney most likely. Then the woman would likely say no and there would be little argument after all it is her kidney. But in the case of abortion, the human life inside of her is alive due to her actions (at least over 90% of the time). The human life never asked to use her body.

Also, since when has the size, level of development, environment, or dependency ever determine the value of a human life except in the case of abortion. In these instances, it ultimately comes down to convenience over 90% of the time. A teenager is not a baby but one is not consider more or less valuable in life.
Posted by Kelisitaan 1 year ago
Kelisitaan
Verita, did you even read the arguments, or are you just spewing nonsense without realizing every point you made has already been addressed?

A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body. Period. If she doesn't want to give a dying man a kidney, she doesn't have to. BUT OH MY GOD THE POOR MAN DYING AND THE WOMAN WOULDNT GIVE HIM HER KIDNEY. HE'S SO VIOLATED. No, he's not violated. He's not allowed to use a woman's body without her permission. Same with the fetus.

The car crash example demonstrates very clearly that just because one does an action doesn't mean he or she should have to live with the consequences if there are ways to fix them. Simple concept, yet clearly too difficult for you to understand.

Rather than spew your nonsense drivel, try to learn instead. You might, you know, actually become smarter.
Posted by Verita 1 year ago
Verita
Your analogy of being in a car accident knowing the risks and therefore posing the question of going to the hospital as shirking your responsibility of it is at best inadequate and at worse odious in supporting your thesis. Let's deconstruct your analogy. First, getting into a car to drive somewhere is NOT anywhere close to conceiving another human life. Muddying the waters
by holding everyday travel and the risks it carries to engaging in unprotected sex which by design is going to conceive life at parity is absurd. People don't travel in cars because of the probable likelihood of getting into an accident much less it being the intended purpose of driving a car. The sexual encounter was a choice that the mother could have refused (especially being fully aware of the probable consequence of a pregnancy), however she didn't, and she obviously was not ready to face motherhood leading to the abortion. Driving a car simply can not be compared to bringing a life into this world.
Second, I fail to see the correlation between a pregnant woman ending the life of her own child due to her not wanting her life to change and seeking medical attention after an accident in any comparable way to avoiding personal responsibility. One involves being responsible for the willful death of another avoiding the role of motherhood, and the other being a case where you are allowing yourself to possibly die an agonizing death (which may not have even been caused by your own error). Remember, the mother's life is intact...she gets to leave the clinic after the procedure to continue her life. The baby that she was complicit in conceiving does NOT. The whole argument of it "being the woman's body" is a pernicious red herring. It's the now dead infant's body lying in a medical waste container who's rights were violated...the woman's body endured a procedure. Committing infanticide to prevent her life from changing is ABSOLUTELY shirking all personal responsibility.
Posted by hhhaaannn333 1 year ago
hhhaaannn333
I think that there is both wrong with abortion because In the womb it is still a fetus not a human and not alive.
Therefore abortion is stopping something from growing into a human.
You may not agree with abortion but answer me this is you were in the situation of either you are pregnant or you have got someone pregnant and you are young and still have your entire life ahead of you, you don't want kids yet what do you do?
Give birth and give them up for adoption yet adding another child to the already overpopulated world or have it aborted causing no emotional suffering for the them if they were to be born.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by tommylibertarian1 1 year ago
tommylibertarian1
Swim1216KelisitaanTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 says killing babies is wrong but makes no defense of why abortion is killing a baby. Con makes a solid case based on the self ownership axiom that the woman owns her body and that the fetus is inherently dependent on the woman's body thus she owns it. Con uses their age and lack of knowledge as a defense for not presenting an argument. Pro goes to a god belief without proper justification or defense of it. Con makes a case that abortion is not killing and make analogies to support that. While not necessarily agreeing with that form of argument con at least makes a coherent case. Pro concedes. Given Con's valid forms of argument and concession by Pro points awarded to Con.
Vote Placed by EXOPrimal 1 year ago
EXOPrimal
Swim1216KelisitaanTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession, but the last round was funny.