The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Should Abortion Be Outlawed

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
squonk has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/23/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 608 times Debate No: 100237
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)




Abortion is murder!!!!!!!!! You are killing a baby. Life begins at conception for those of you who aren't scientists. Every baby has a future and potential to live and it is just as bad as murder to take that away. Even if you are not religious, which should definitely lead you to choose life, how can you morally be ok with what these people do to babies, they rip them up, burn them, or crush their heads and then throw the remains in the trash. It is incredible to me how retarded liberals can say, "The capital punishment is wrong" which is usually for convicted murderers, but then support the slaughtering of defenseless babies. It disgusts me and I hope the Lord has mercy on their souls. If anyone thinks they have a better argument, go ahead.


"Not until twenty-eight weeks, at 77 percent of full-term development, does the fetus acquire sufficient neocortical complexity to exhibit some of the cognitive capacities typically found in newborns. Fetus EEG recordings with the characteristics of an adult EEG appear at approximately thirty weeks, or 83 percent of full-term development. In other words, the capacity for human thought does not exist until just weeks before birth. Of all the characteristics used to define what it means to be human, the capacity to think is provisionally agreed upon by most scientists to be the most important. By this criterion, since virtually no abortions are performed after the second trimester, and before then there is no scientific evidence that the fetus is a thinking human individual, it is reasonable for us to provisionally agree that abortion is not murder and to offer our provisional assent that abortions within the first two trimesters are not immoral because the evidence confirms that during this time the fetus is not a fully functioning human being. Therefore, although one may oppose abortion on a personal level, there is no scientific justification to shift the abortion issue from a personal and moral one to a social and political one." [1]

Our ability to think is what sets humans apart from other animals. The capacity to think defines what it means to be human. Just as it's not "murder" to pull the plug on a brain-dead person, it's not "murder" to abort a baby before the second trimester; their minds don't work yet.

[1] Michael Shermer, "The Science of Good and Evil"
Debate Round No. 1


"I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.... I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life....
I am no more prepared to say that these early stages [of development in the womb] represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of not a human being. This is human life at every stage."[1]

"after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being."
"is no longer a matter of taste or opinion," "Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception."[2]

[1] Dr. Alfred M. Bongiovanni, testimony to the Judiciary Subcommittee
[2] Dr. Jerome Lejeune, testimony to the Judiciary Subcommittee

I can cite numerous more articles and doctors speaking about the beginning of life. Almost every source I've come across confirms the fact that life begins at conception, and a new human is created. At that moment a set of genes is created unique to ANY other before that. Though I see the logic in your argument that the fetus is not conscious, and "brain-dead", it has the probable potential to gain consciousness. My analogy is someone in a coma, I realize they do have brain activity, but they are not conscious, but we know that it is possible for them to wake up. With a fetus, we know that the baby, except for the case of miscarriage, will sustain brain activity. There is a type of energy called potential energy, is there not. It is still energy. A fetus is potential life. By that logic I can make the assumption that the baby does possess life, but awaits for the full development of his physical body, or in translation, the rope to be cut that is holding the mass creating the potential energy. I'm sure 95% of the mothers that had an abortion would change there mind if they could see their baby's potential to grow up to be something wonderful.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Trump27 3 years ago

I am also glad that you are judging my opening statement and my opinion on the matter but ignoring other rounds. There are five rounds I think I will have more than enough time to grammatically-correctly cite web articles.
Posted by Trump27 3 years ago
well I tend to focus on my content rather than reducing my usage of exclamation points even though it displeases the grammar Nazis who vote on debates based on punctuation. Hurry up you only got 22 hours left
Posted by squonk 3 years ago
I'll get my next argument posted tomorrow.
Posted by CosmoJarvis 3 years ago
Well, if Squonk cannot make a good argument (which I am not trying to imply), he will certainly at least get points from exercising proper grammar usage and conduct. Trump27's numerous exclamation points, failure to use basic punctuation, run-on sentences, and incomplete sentences have certainly lowered the bar for conduct and grammar. Also, saying things like "retarded liberals" is fairly callow.

Good luck, squonk. Don't let me down. As Shia Labeouf once said, "Just do it... Don't let your dreams be dreams... Wake up and just do it!"
Posted by John_C_1812 3 years ago
Abortion is a confession to a crime. It is under this basic principle it can be proved to be illegal and the judicial separation, Sate licensed doctors, and woman should be aware of this fact. It will not ever change. The Constitutional comparison is made between a choice to confess and not confess. Gender specific amputation Vs Pregnancy abortion. Which of these two is self-incriminating and what specific evidence is being suggests could be found by an impartial investigation.

This medical process has been sold globally in a world trade. How does one recall a confession on a crime with no Statute of limitation?
Posted by Trump27 3 years ago
That was just an opening statement, I do intend to use factual evidence in the rounds to come, but thanks for the advice! And though I do still find it wrong, I am willing to allow a rape baby to be the mother's choice, and it will be her decision that she will have to live with. jonathonave I will be sure to challenge you but I might have to reuse some content from this debate.
Posted by TimWagnes 3 years ago
What if the baby was acquired from a rape?
Posted by MacAngell 3 years ago
Pro, I would recommend you use facts with sources, less unsubstantiated (no sources provided) emotional manipulation, and keep things more civil (i.e., don't say people who disagree with you disgust you, even if that's personally the case for you--it's not decent debate etiquette and you'll never persuade anyone to agree with you by insulting them). This is meant to be friendly advice for doing better in voting and being a member who contributes positively to the community.

Good luck. I hope you take into consideration what Con has to say, though; a debate should be an outlet both to share your views /and/ to recognize the concerns of the other side. You seem violently opinionated about this, in a way that makes me think you haven't yet tried to sympathize with or understand people who don't agree with you on certain issues (it's important even when you're sure you're right!). In any debate, it concerns me to see one side using anger and shame as tactics. Supporting your opinions with facts, especially when it comes to matters of the legal system, is essential for a good debate. : )
Posted by jonathonave 3 years ago
I will argue Con if you put this into a three round format and send it to me as a challenge.
This debate has 6 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

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