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

Debate Mash-up Challenge: If an unborn child is gay, abortion should be illegal

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: 8/11/2013 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 970 times Debate No: 36596
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




It's time to ruffle some major feathers and let the most hated debate battle begin!!!

American society is committed in ending marginalization and discrimination. But killing an innocent child is a form of persecution.

Is it because unborn children are not a minority (all of us at some point are), hence they don't deserve choice?

But as some of our morally deficit friends would say - unborn children are not yet fully developed human beings and should not be granted human rights. Although they forget to mention that in human history, the same arguments are used to legalize slavery - some are not fully developed mentally and so slavery upon them is justified.

And so on one hand, we kill unborn children but on the other, we are committed in ending persecution. Is it because the latter is more vocal and visible in the media?

Ladies and gentlement, this debate is not about legalizing gay marriage or criminalizing abortion.

The motion of this debate is not about policy but an attempt at resolving the question of moral philosophy - are our modern values regarding discrimination, homosexuality and abortion, selective, biased and at odds with each other?

First round is for acceptance!


If the child is gonna be gay it's still going to be a human being. The child gay or straight faced with the decision of life or death is gonna make the obvious decision that it would live. Obviously the unborn can't make the decision but why wouldn't you let that child live on and let it be itself. It can still be very successful in any category and by the time it becomes an adult they are gonna be allowed to be married and nobody is going to believe they chose that and I don't believe it is a disability that restricts or questions that child's ability at success which should be judged by the quality of work. I believe that this child is still in a position to become a successful human being and maybe even change the lives of everyone in the world. It's undeniably evident that the kid is going to endure bullying and harassment but my little brother is bullied because he isn't athletic and he had so many birth defects and my parents knew about it before birth. But believe me my parents have never second guessed their decision to let him live because because although he isn't like us he reminds us the simple moral values of love, faith, and respect is all someone needs to be happy all their life. We are all the same and gay, straight, bi, or even if you don't have a sexuality at all(which some people have literally no sexual desire or preference) we are all the same there is no difference. Once again I want to stress being gay isn't a disability that will hold back someone from being what they want to be. That child has the potential to be whatever it desires and if they have the strength to accept their difference then we are gonna have to accept it as well it's gonna become a norm to see gay people. It won't become the majority but that Child deserves to live as long as the mother isn't at risk during birth or was raped. I believe this link has a few really helpful answers as to why gays can still be successful.

And to the voters please think of this in a situation where only situation abortion is legal because that is really going to be the only way this debate would come up.
Debate Round No. 1


;) I knew it !!!

I was expecting (hoping even) that someone will troll this debate. It was unfortunately, however that he/she chose to ignore the introduction.

The motion and introductory text were sprinkled with a good dose of sarcasm because I hoped it will attract the intellectually brave.

Sarcasm, for today, will just have take a punch in the face!

But as always, let's move on

The values of MODERN American culture decree the end to all forms of persecution, and we have finally tackled the one that has always been at our closets for the longest time - HOMOSEXUALITY.

But aren't we being hippocrites?

On one hand, we are convinced we have to change attitudes towards persecution of gays. But on the other, we are willing to perpetuate the most evil of persecutions, one that involves the innocent.

The status quo has now shifted to pro-gay so why not end abortion too?


It obviously will not match everyone's taste, but this was the intention of the mash-up challenge!

I am the PRO

Being the PRO, I am the devil's advocate and will defend the motion that modern values regarding discrimination, homosexuality and abortion are selective, biased and at odds with each other. And therefore, Americans are hippocrites!

There, I laid it all out ;)

A way of defending the CON is to argue that similar to the persecution of homosexuaity, women are victims of domestic abuse and that pregnancy is one of the most potent tools to silence the victims. Pro-choice movements are merely seeking abortion as means to end the cycle of abuse.

So abortion and modern attitudes towards homosexuality, both seeking to end persecution, are very consistent with each other. And so therefore, Americans are not hippocrites!

This debate is not a soliloquy

My opponent has already started his empassioned defense against abortion regardless of the sexual orientation of the unborn.

This is a complete misreading of the motion so how do we proceed?

I shall let my opponent decide, that is if he/she is reading this at all.


alevan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


It goes without saying that homosexuality has increasingly become a sensitive issue in America.
Openness is the modern agenda and those who keep a backward perspective are not welcome.

Anti-gay has become a taboo. It now even came to the point that anyone who wants to "tackle" any "gay" issue is viewed with distrust and skepticism.

This debate is guilty of the same.

I'm not anti-gay (far from it) but I want to use the recent positive developments in support of gays to propel discussions on a separate but related issue that concerns persecution.

If modern society is willing to end the persecution of homosexuals, it should likewise examine its conscience about the gravest persecution of all, those that involve the innocent unborn children.

In the promotion slavery, some of the greatest minds of the time argued "their mental capacity are not fully developed". In the case of homosexuals, "they are not natural". And in abortion, "they are not humans".

Same issue but society is bent on applying different rules.

Some may think this is adhoc but this is precisely why I called this debate "Mash-up challenge".


alevan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


It is unfortunate that a person chose to troll the debate.

It goes to show that when it comes to certain issues, some are prejudicial.

Ending persecution is a must and what makes us human is our ability to reach out to another human being, regardless of their color, sexual orientation and geographical location.

So the gravest crime we can make is to decry that some people are not human beings because of where they are situated geographically. A womb afterall is just another point, a space-time coordinate situated in Earth.

Are we are embracing homosexuality because it is fashionable and a vogue in modern pop culture?

Horrible of me to ask this! But if we are sincere about ending persecution, why can't it be inclusive all at once and not selective based on the fashion of the times?

And so if it is selective it must be because our values are selective, and therefore not consistent with each other.


I'll spare the time waiting and let it go straight to voting my last statement is that while I understand your position as the "devils advocate" the topic itself stands alone and while America as a whole is inconsistent and hypocritical I am debating is single issue my apologies for the troll as well
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by DT 5 years ago
One way of defending the CON is to argue that similar to the persecution of homosexuaity, women are victims of domestic abuse and that pregnancy is one of the most potent tools to silence the victims. Pro-choice movements are merely seeking abortion as means to end the cycle of abuse.

So abortion and modern attitudes towards homosexuality, both seeking to end persecution, are very consistent with each other.

I will, quite controversially, will play the devil's advocate.
Posted by DT 5 years ago
As PRO, I will argue that as an American society, our values pertaining to discrimination and persecution especially when viewed in the MODERN context BETWEEN homosexuality AND abortion, are selective, biased and at odds with each other.

While we are willing to end persecution of homosexuality, we choose and selectively remain "prejudicial" when it comes to abortion.

If this is confusing, let me offer a related example of values towards capital punishment and abortion. Capital punishment in principle are reserved for quilty criminals while abortion are conducted to innocent unborn children.

So regardless of our attitudes towards capital punishment, it has no bearing on our values towards abortion.

On other hand, I will argue that the modern reversal of attitudes towards homosexuality leaves into question of whether we are leaving aborted children behind.
Posted by Splenic_Warrior 5 years ago
I was thinking about taking this, but I think the resolution is both complicated and vague. Exactly what position is Pro taking?

If you are taking the position that our opinions on discrimination, abortion, etc, are not consistent... Of course they aren't. If they were easy, clear-cut questions, there wouldn't be much to debate about.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Two missed rounds, is an FF to me. However the topic itself made me facepalm a little.