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


Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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: 10/21/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 852 times Debate No: 118655
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)




I am pro-life. Abortion is murder because life begins at conception, Unborn babies are humans that have the right to life. Pro-life with some exceptions which are; rape (unless mother wants to keep child), Mother's life, Mother's health, Incest, Fetal life, Fetal health.

I am open to a discussion to an opposing side. I will give evidential arguments on rounds 2, 3, 4, And 5.


Abortion is not murder because life does not begin at conception. A fetus cannot be killed if it was never alive. Also, Murder is sometimes the more moral decision.
Debate Round No. 1


At the moment when a human sperm penetrates a human egg, Generally in the upper portion of the Fallopian Tube, A new entity comes into existence. "Zygote" is the name of the first cell formed at conception, The earliest developmental stage of the human embryo, Followed by the "Morula" and "Blastocyst" stages. The zygote consist of human DNA and other human molecules, It's nature is undeniably human not some other species. This DNA has a complete design. Guiding early development and even hereditary attributes that will appear in childhood and adulthood. Hair, Eye color, And even personality traits. It is clear that the earliest embryo is biologically alive meeting the following criteria; metabolism, Growth, Reaction to stimuli, And reproduction. The human zygote is a human organism. Scientists define a organism as a complex structure of interdependent elements constituted to carry out the activities of life by separately functioning but mutually dependent organs. The human zygote obviously fits this definition.

"Zygote. This cell, Formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. Zyg tos, Yoked together), Represents the beginning of a human being. The common expression 'fertilized ovum' refers to the zygote. "
[Moore, Keith L. And Persaud, T. V. N. Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company, 1993, P. 1]

"Although life is a continuous process, Fertilization is a critical landmark because, Under ordinary circumstances, A new, Genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed. . . . The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity. "
[O'Rahilly, Ronan and MA533;ller, Fabiola. Human Embryology & Teratology. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, Pp. 8, 29. This textbook lists "pre-embryo" among "discarded and replaced terms" in modern embryology, Describing it as "ill-defined and inaccurate" (p. 12}].

At conception a baby's sex is decided boy or girl. 18-21 days after conception the baby's heart is beating.


Just because the zygote is a human or alive does not mean it is wrong, Sometimes it is morally just to murder, Examples are the death penalty, Euthanasia, Self-defense etc. . . It should only be the choice of the mother. There are situations where a child being born causes more suffering than being aborted, Such as Africa where children are born and starve to death not long after.
Debate Round No. 2


It is not morally just to kill an unborn human because the unborn human has not attempted to voluntarily commit immoral behavior or actions to anyone. Death penalty, Euthanasia, Self-defense are irrelevant and do not apply or make it justifiable to kill an unborn human. The vast majority of mothers do not have good justifiable reasons to kill an unborn human so therefore it is immoral.

According to research collected from 2008 to 2010, Reasons women choose to abort their child; not financially prepared (40%), Not ready/not planned (36%), Partner-related issues like bad relationships (31%), Needs to focus on other children (29%), Not emotionally/mentally prepared (19%), Interferes with educational/vocational plans (20%), Health-related reasons (12%), Not mature enough for baby (7%), Influenced from family or friends (5%), And doesn't want the baby or place it for adoption (4%). This survey has women use open-ended questions instead of a checklist.

Willfully killing someone with full awareness of the purity with the unborn human is immoral. There is not justification for killing an unborn child due to the reasons women gave above (research collected from 2008 through 2010).


An unborn human does not have to voluntarily commit immoral behavior for the termination to be justified. Again, As long as being alive involves more suffering than not being alive it is morally acceptable to perform the abortion. You say that the vast majority of mothers do not have good justifiable reasons but how do you know this? This is something that only the mothers themselves are equipped to answer. Being not financially prepared is important, There is a correlation between money and suffering. Same for children of bad relationships and parents who are not emotionally prepared. Again, As long as being alive causes more suffering, The abortion is moral.
Debate Round No. 3


I am basing that statement, "the vast majority of mothers do not have good justifiable reasons" on the research data from 2008 through 2010). Yes I agree being financially prepared is important. Which is why the mother AND father of the child should be financially and mentally/emotionally prepared for the responsibility. Everyone that gets involved in sexual activity knows and is aware of the possible outcomes of the situation. If you had voluntarily sex with someone you know what the possible consequences are. If you try to avoid taking responsibility of the unborn human and don't hold yourself accountable for one's actions then you are irresponsible, Insubordinate, And childish. I do not think that abortion is moral because of the known possibilities that mother and father are aware of when engaged in sexual activity.


Abstinence from sex is a completely unrealistic expectation to place on any society. Sex is a natural instinct and is bound to happen regardless of any rationalizations you make. And so what if a young mother doesn't understand the gravity of sexual activity, Does that mean their child should suffer the consequence? Impoverished Africans will have sex no matter what, And you will have to accept that your policy would increase the amount of suffering dramatically.
Debate Round No. 4


If a psychopath had the natural instinct to kill or rape someone, Would that make it okay? Because it's natural? It is the parents fault if they are not mentally, Financially, Prepared etc. If you don't want a kid and are not ready for the responsibility then that is simple enough to not engage in sexual activity. Be a responsible and mature adult. Resist the temptation to do things that you know will ruin your future expectations and/or conflict with it. I am saying that adults should take full ownership of the choices that they freely make.

This is the last round. We can have another debate if you would like (if you want, Free will). I do appreciate you engaging in this debate with me. Thank you for your time.


Psychopathy is a mental illness and an aberration of human behavior unlike sex, Which is a necessity for life. And psychopaths do often get reduced sentences and are spared of the death penalty. I understand where you are coming from when you say that parents should be responsible, But that's just not the society we live in, And I see abortion as a way to alleviate at least some of the suffering that exist. Is it reasonable to expect a child every time you have sex?
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Leaning 3 years ago
Their morality is closer to mine. Though the fact that their morality concerning abortion is a bit closer to mine does not mean automatic win. A cr*p argument for ProLife would lose against a masterful argument for ProChoice (I think). Round 4: People make the choice of the chance of a kid when they choose to have sex, Con seems right there to me. Eh, Existence is suffering. . . And happiness. But I don't think anyone should choose but that individual really. Individual being the kid. Though the parents have to choose to give a choice, Start the life and all. Seems cheap to pull the rug out though. Like a starfish flickin a switch to a lightbulb giving warmth to an egg Life! Death! Life! Death! Once the life has started, Seems that kid has a right to it. Unrealistic expectation? Eh, Society has seen many changes. Leaning toward Con. Round 5: If a psychopath had the natural instinct to kill or rape someone, Would that make it okay? . Eh, I am a nihilist and believe in subjective morality. . . So, Yes? Well, To that person. I'd still see it as wrong, As would my meter stick for average human morality I'd think. Is it reasonable to expect a child every time you have sex? YES. Though not everyone is that lucky or unlucky depending on their views. Eh, I find Con more convincing, So that's where my votes are going. Then again, Way I feel is people shouldn't get abortions, But I don't quite care enough to march about it really. Besides, Ain't my body. I'm still not convinced on who is right or what human is and all that jazz. The miserable life and all isn't enough for me to say abort them really. I mean c'mon I answered it's better to be tortured than die on that one poll. Though I think people ought to choose for themselves when they get that chance. Babies to seem unfair in a way living off the mother, Almost like a parasite. . . Hmm, Why do I feel like I'm making most people angry here? Ah well, Anyway. Honestly I don't know, But I found Con more convincing and yada yada. . . .
Posted by gzitman 3 years ago
Sure, Challenge me to a debate on Free Will.
Posted by billsands 3 years ago
A fetus is not a human being even in the bible The only verses I know that address the legal status of "seed" in the womb come in a brief section of case law.

Exodus 21:22-25 describes a case where a pregnant woman jumps into a fight between her husband and another man and suffers injuries that cause her to miscarry. Injuries to the woman prompt the normal penalties for harming another human being: an eye for an eye, A tooth for a tooth, A life for a life. Killing the woman is murder, A capital crime.

The miscarriage is treated differently, However " as property loss, Not murder. The assailant must pay a fine to the husband. The law of a life for a life does not apply. The fetus is important, But it"s not human life in the same way the pregnant woman is.

My impression is that most Americans have a more nuanced and conservative view than the Bible does on this, Though we"re getting at the same idea: an important moral and legal line is crossed when the fetus can survive outside the womb.

For the Bible, That"s when a child is born and starts breathing. For many of us today, It"s when a fetus becomes "viable" " somewhere between 21 and 27 weeks into the pregnancy, Thanks to our amazing medical technology.
Posted by SomethingOrdinary 3 years ago
I just want to throw out there that the percentages listed in round 3 for reasons why women choose to have abortions totaled far more than 100%. Is that to imply there were multiple reasons or was the data just wrong?
Posted by Shavo 3 years ago
OK here is the thing. I'm pro-choice.
A fetus, Zygote and all that, May be human. That is because biologically it has human DNA. The problem of abortion isn't about whether it is human or not, It's a matter of personhood. Personhood is basically a measure of whether or not it is a person. Whether a fetus is a person or not is debatable and it has no proper definition. This is why some agree and others don't. The flag of personhood varies depending on who makes the choice.

Have you heard about the zika virus? If a pregnant woman is infected the baby will have conditions in which its cranium is smaller and an under-developed brain. This leads to trouble in motor skills, Learning and a number of other disablilties. Detecting the zika infection in unborn babies is normally accomplished in the 3rd trimester. Aborting during the 3rd trimester is illegal in many states. So the woman is unfortunately forced to take care of that baby which has special needs, Causing greater expenses financially and the baby itself is cursed for life. It will never be able to be like the other children. It is a harsh reality. So abortion being illegal. . . Good thing?

Same rule applies to women who aren't prepared for the baby. The child is going to suffer due it initially being unwanted. It won't have the right parental back up to live as a child must and will most likely be neglected. Ending it before it is capable of feeling is better that ending it while it has them, Isn't that better?

I will track back to what i started with, It is a choice. It is better for both the mother and the child. Sure you may think the mother aborting goes against your values and morals. . . But it's not your child is it? It is not your baby, It is not your fetus, It is not your zygote, It is not your egg, It is not a person.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Leaning 3 years ago
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Round 1: Tie, because both are still just revving up the engines of their arguments. Round 2: Con argument for identifying the conception thing as human sounds good and science-y, has a few sources and so on. Pro argument reminds me of Antinatalism a bit. Hmm, he's not wrong that some people would choose not to have kids because they would find it immoral to have kids at a time in their lives when they would not be able to provide for them. Hmm, I am unsure about the argument about just because it is alive or just because it is human. Honestly, that usually confuses me because it get's so..... complicated. Not sure I ever see killing as right, just less wrong. Sooo, tie? With Con winning on sources. Round3: Eh, I can see how Pros previous examples are comparable. What is human, what is a humans right in comparison to another and all that. I think morality subjective, so eh, both can be right to themselves. Though I'm leaning toward Con, because their morality is - Continued in Commen

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.