The Instigator
shabazz31091
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
Murchadha
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

People who are against abortion are anti choice, not "pro life"

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...
shabazz31091
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/16/2018 Category: Health
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 669 times Debate No: 115580
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)

 

shabazz31091

Pro

I will argue that people who are against abortion are anti choice, not pro life, and my opponent will argue that they are pro life, not anti choice. People who are "pro life", are actually anti choice, because according to most scientists and researchers, actual life begins at birth, not conception. Fetuses can"t feel any pain during abortions, nor are they at all aware of their surroundings or what is happening. If sperm aren"t humans, and killing them isn"t morally wrong, then why is aborting a fetus wrong? Anyway, unwanted babies often have terrible lives after birth, so an abortion would be better for both the mother and the child. Using this arguement, I will say that people who claim to be pro life are actually anti choice, because all they want to do is restrict a womans right to choose what they do with their pregancy and body. I will wait for my opponent to respond to this claim with their counter arguement.
Murchadha

Con

This is always a fun lesson to 'educate people on', let's Begin this dance.

I will begin the first round be responding to a few of your beginning points. - I do hope you have more points and haven't laid out your entire argument in the first round.

Pro-Life........... when is a baby Alive??

"most scientists and researchers, actual life begins at birth" - Perhaps life does in the sense of a new journey, but does that mean it wasn't alive before being born. Is the gift of life something your doctor gives the child and not the parents? lets talk about even after your born _ what qualifies you as being alive in your 20's? is it a beating heart? is it the ability to experience pain? is it the fact you have a brain?

4 weeks after conception the fetus develops the beginning of its neural tube and spine - a level of neural activity equivalent to a slug _ but slugs are called alive (- o -) at the same time the heart has slightly formed and begun to beat. - sadly two-thirds of abortions reported in the united states occurs 6 weeks after conception, granted the science claims that fetuses only begin to develop pain responses 27 weeks into gestation and only about 1% of women are able to get an abortion at this stage.

"restrict a woman's right to choose what they do with their pregnancy and body" - I will concede that telling a woman what to do with her own body is absurd, however a fetus is not, in fact, a part of the mothers body, from the moment it started out as an egg floating out of her ovaries, it would be silly to say that an egg laid by a bird is still a part of its 'body', and if your uncomfortable comparing memals to birds CONSIDER THE PLATAPUS. and even while the blastocyte merges with the mothers utteran lining it doesn't 'become a part of her body...'again' it now feeds on the nutrients in her blood more like a parasite (or symbiote, some studies have found that an incubating child can even donate white blood cells to the mother for fighting off viruses). In fact, the most fundamental proof that it never was is the fact a part of her is that it is genetically unique from the mother [Similar I grant you] but not the same, only half and you can thank the father for that _ right from the moment his sperms penetrated her egg (The beginning basically)
Debate Round No. 1
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by MisterPersonPeopleMortal 3 years ago
MisterPersonPeopleMortal
I think that both names are biased. Pro-life suggests that anyone who disagrees with them hates and disrespects the lives of others, while Pro-choice suggest that anyone who disagrees with them hates and disrespects the ability of other people to make choices.
Posted by Nanowasabi 3 years ago
Nanowasabi
This seems like a strange debate. Pro is arguing that the pro-lifers are not pro-life, and, while he does raise points as to why the pro-life viewpoint could be flawed, the actual point of contention is that the majority of the pro-lifers are lying about their motives. What pro should be presenting is statistics about the proportion of male to female pro-lifers, if males are predominant, and sexist statements made by pro-lifers. However, he basically uses the argument of "pro-choice is the correct side, therefore the other side must be lying," which turned this into a standard abortion debate. I won't be casting a vote in con's direction, since he didn't catch this, but I feel like pro really messed this one up.
Posted by Murchadha 3 years ago
Murchadha
@Markak1968

there's no guarantee that the embryo will continue to develop right after conception. once 4 weeks has passed is really when you can tell a lot about the vitality of the fetus and its future development, and as I stated is around the time important functions we use to define life in adults (heartbeat and neural network) begin functioning.
Posted by Markak1968 3 years ago
Markak1968
My apology to Con. I didn't finish reading but see now you made that point.

I'll shut up now.
Posted by Markak1968 3 years ago
Markak1968
My question to Con would be why is 4 weeks what seems to be your starting point for arguing when human life begins? Could 4 weeks happen without conception happening first?
Posted by Markak1968 3 years ago
Markak1968
The problem with Pro's argument is 'choice' is not what pro life or pro choice is about. It's about abortion. Pretty life people are against abortion. Pro choice are for it. To clarify, the former believe it should be illegal. The latter believe it should be legal
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by RMTheSupreme 3 years ago
RMTheSupreme
shabazz31091MurchadhaTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Con couldn't win this debate even though they went as far as semi-proving that (if we take the fetus to not be part of the woman's body) the woman's killing of the fetus is not her interacting with her own body alone. Pro-life takes the choice away, pro-choice gives it. In fact, this is why the abortion side is called pro-choice. If you give someone the choice to murder, it's still the side of choice. Con took an unwinnable side of a truism debate and did their very best but failed regardless. I am aware that Con will say that Pro didn't prove it was not 'pro life' to be anti-choice but Pro did prove this by separating the fetus from a living human being. In a debate, if Pro's round one has a definition, that is sacred since Con accepted the given definitions.

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