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
jonathonave 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: 2/24/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 703 times Debate No: 100247
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




Abortion is the legal killing of babies. Defenseless in the womb, the unborn children are ripped and burned to shreds and thrown in the trash. Their unique set of genes is completely wasted and destroyed for the parents' convenience. Almost every scientist in the field will tell you that life begins at conception, and ending the potential for life is just as bad as ending it after the potential person has been moved from the uterus to the hands of the doctor. If necessary I intend to provide as much proof as wanted to prove that when you abort a baby, you are killing a life and ending an opportunity to live.


Thank you to my opponent for creating such a relevant and important debate.

Before we begin, let"s define a few key terms.

Abortion " the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy

Outlaw " ban: make illegal

Life " the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death

My opponent has taken the stance that abortion should be outlawed. In order for my opponent to win this
round, you must be completely convinced that abortion should be illegal in all instances, with absolutely no exceptions.

I will be showing you why my opponent is incorrect through a few simple contentions.

Contention 1: Abortion does not necessarily violate life

Link: Life requires functional activity
In the definition of life which I provided above, we see four simple conditions that must be met in order to consider someone or something alive. Let"s focus specifically on the third standard. The definition states that in order to be alive, we must see "functional activity." If we do not see this standard met, we cannot consider life to exist.

Link: Functional activity does not begin before 20 weeks
According to an article by the Scientific American, (, a fetus is not "sentient" until after placental abruption, or the separation of the fetus from the placenta. This takes place, as stated in the article, sometime after 20 weeks. Without sentience, we cannot expect a fetus to fulfill this standard of functional activity.

Impact: Abortion before 20 weeks does not take life
Before 20 weeks, the fetus does not fulfill the criterion by which life is defined. This means that any abortion taking place before 20 weeks should not be considered as the taking of life, considering that there is no life to be taken.

Having established that abortion should not always be considered the taking of life, let us turn to some reasons that abortion should be considered a crucial right of women.

Contention 2: Abortion is a fundamental Women"s Right

Link: Women are discriminated against
An article from Project Concern International, studies have found that women are discriminated against on a regular basis in the workplace, by society, and even by laws in some nations. (

Link: Unwanted pregnancies put women at a disadvantage
Children are an economic strain on any family unit. Abortions are most often employed by women who do not see support for the child to be a viable economic path for their family unit, which often consists of just the woman, who is already struggling to support herself. A single woman struggling to support herself is going to be dragged down by a pregnancy that she is not prepared to support.

Impact: Women"s right to choose
In order for a woman to be able to compete in society, and especially to support herself economically, she needs to be able to make the decision as to whether or not to keep the baby " for herself.

Contention 3: Unwanted pregnancies have terrible impacts
The Brookings Institute published a study finding the following. "The high incidence of unintended pregnancy imposes costs on American society that range from increased rates of crime and welfare participation to reduced levels of high-school completion and labor-force participation."

Whether those effects be upon the woman or, often, girl who becomes pregnant, or upon the child who grows up in a home that does not want him, the negative impacts of unwanted pregnancies must be factored in. The only way to avoid these negative impacts is to allow abortions to take place.

Let"s turn to some of the negative consequences of making abortion illegal.

Disadvantage 1: Increased risk to women
Before abortion was ruled a constitutional right by the U.S. Supreme Court, women went to all sorts of abortion providers when they found themselves in need. Because of the questionable legality of abortion at that point, some of those abortion providers were safer than others. In states where abortion was considered illegal, or heavily frowned upon, young girls had to go to unverified, often unsafe sources in order to get their abortions. After abortion was ruled constitutional, measures went into effect to ensure that all abortion providers were certified, and that safe abortion sources were available to everyone. By siding with my opponent in this round, we revert to the unsafe measures that girls had to take before abortion was legal.

Disadvantage 2: Backsliding on Woman"s Rights
As established above in Contention 2, abortion is a fundamental right of all women, because women have a right to do what they want with their own bodies. If we take this away from them, we put women in position of inferiority in society. Unwanted pregnancies are thrust upon women, with no promise of support from the father, and no way for the woman to continue to support herself economically. In order to avoid this, we must side against my opponent in this round.

To conclude my opening arguments, remember blank very important things.
1. I order to side with my opponent, you must agree that abortion should be illegal in all circumstances.
2. Abortion is a fundamental right for all women. Taking this away from them prevents women from operating freely in society to the same capacity as men.
3. Removing legal abortion will not stop abortions from taking place. Rather it will present an incredible risk to women, who are forced to either (1) stall in society, or (2) get illegal and unsafe abortions. This is not a situation into which a fair or just society has any right to put women.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you to my opponent for accepting my challenge in this debate and requesting such a significant topic.

Firstly, I would like to clear confusion on my stance on the illegalization of abortion. Clearly I am not able to define all terms of the legislation within the debate title, so I would like to do that now. What I am arguing for is for abortion to be made illegal, except for the cases in which the mother's health is in serious danger, or where the baby was acquired from a legitimate, court-proven rape. Though it is still frowned upon, in these cases the choice is really about the mother's body, unlike the abortions of babies conceived and carried under normal circumstances.

My opponents claim that a fetus does not have the four requirements for life is somewhat true, but does not go against the definition of life. My opponent has ignored an important part of the definition. The definition states CAPACITY for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death. A fetus does have the capacity to eventually sustain all of these life functions. Its ability to do so is taken away when it is killed by the abortionist. Also, the claim that it does not have functional activity is false. Fetuses experience functional activity very early in the pregnancy, though it may not be felt until anywhere from 13-25 weeks. This activity is movement, it is any process life exhibits. Babies move in the womb. They kick, they move their arms and legs. This is considered functional activity is it not. This proves that this standard of life is met.

According to your article, the functional activity does not begin for 20 weeks. This is untrue, because functional activity begins almost immediately after conception[1]. The activity is cell division, this is a functional activity, and is exhibited by many forms of life. Sentience is not necessary for this. Animals, plants, bacteria, etc. are usually considered insentient, but are still alive. If this is considered functioning activity, so should be the activity of the human fetus and zygote.

As I've proven that the fetus does exhibit the quality of life my opponent claims it does not, his argument that it is not murder is contradicted. The fetus does fulfill the criterion of life, and killing it, by definition, is murder.

No, women are not, in this day in age, in the Western world, discriminated against, in the workplace or anywhere else. This article gives many facts to why that is simply untrue[2]. The wage gap has been debunked numerous times, and so has gender discrimination in the workplace[3]. At least unless your talking about some third-world, Middle-eastern country. Though that is irrelevant since we are talking about legislation within the United States and potentially other Western nations.

Of course unwanted pregnancies put not only women, but men as well, at a disadvantage. That is why they are unwanted. But your actions have consequences, and the parents should have thought about that before conceiving the child. No one forced that woman to become pregnant. If you went out and shot someone, you would be arrested. You couldn't say, oh this puts me at a disadvantage. It is the same with pregnancy, you should have thought about the consequences before causing them. It is called maturity. This is why, though, our government forces the father to pay child support, and usually it is unfair to the father. She made a bad decision, a decision she will have to live with. Why does her bad judgment have to be taken out on the innocent, defenseless child.

No, she should not get to make that decision. She could have made that decision before she created a new life. She has to be accountable, and her economic convenience DOES NOT take priority over a growing baby.

Obviously unwanted pregnancies are not good. There is a better way to prevent them. Don't get pregnant! Any child would rather be in a "home that doesn't want him", than to be ripped apart or burned to death. Here are some stories of mother's that deeply regret having an abortion[4]. Here are some stories from failed abortions[5]. The only way to avoid these negative impacts is by making good choices and by being accountable for your actions.

Made a right by the Roe v. Wade case. Funny story about that, the Roe, Norma McCorvey, later became pro-life. Ok here's a solution. Crack down on abortion providers and make it clearly equal to manslaughter. If you make that clear I don't know how many women will attempt an illegal abortion. And they would be engaging in illicit activity, so yes, it would be dangerous to engage in murder.

This point really frustrates me with its backward logic. No, actually it is not your body. Unless you are in critical danger, in which I made it clear it is the mother's choice, it is not your body you are deciding on. It is the body of another human being, one who has a whole future. One who's whole life has been ended because of your selfishness. No, we don't put women in a position of inferiority because we forbid them to terminate the lives of others. They are guaranteed child support, and were never forced by anyone to become pregnant. In many cases, the father is left in economic ruin as he must make large child support payments every month.

To rebut my opponent's arguments:
1. I have clarified that not all abortions would be illegal, and that is not the case.
2. It is not a fundamental right of women to become pregnant and then kill the baby at will. They could operate freely if they did not choose to have unprotected intercourse with a man. And no, child support renders men just as economically bound to that child as women. If you didn't want the child, you shouldn't have gotten pregnant, your bad decision does not mean you can kill an innocent human being for your own convenience.
3. Yes, it will stop abortions except for very rare cases. The reason it is different from pre-Roe v. Wade is because this legislation will come down hard on abortions. Unlike confusing laws and unclear rules of the past. It is fair, because the defenseless, innocent child gets to live, and the parents who made the bad decision will have to live with the consequences. That is actually fair, unlike your inhumane and unjust proposals.

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
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Trump27 3 years ago
I hope voters will take my opponent's forfeit seriously into account when voting on this debate, but content, etc. as well.
Posted by Trump27 3 years ago
Saying the law has to be complete or not at all is not true. Murder is not a crime if it is in self-defense, or defending the country in a war. I would say this is less black and white than my proposed abortion legislation. You can not claim that women are discriminated because of a single, potential case that you have not even personally witnessed. If you need any proof (none of which you have given for your case), just click on the link I provided in the argument proving how claims of "systematic discrimination" against women are false. So, making decisions is hard. But you know what is right and wrong. You know the risk you are taking. No one is forcing you to make that decision. Your carelessness should not be taken out on another innocent human being who has a future as well. It doesn't stem from one bad decision, it comes from multiple bad choices that got you to that position. So, instead of encouraging people to kill their babies, we should encourage them to think and make the best, safest decision. Also, letting them out of the consequences teaches them nothing. It is like parenting but without any punishment. They will know they can get away with choosing poorly and will continue to do so. Your final comment has illegible grammar. It is not their bodies we are legislating, it is the baby's body. If it were the mother's body, she would be the one gruesomely ripped apart or burned to death. This law would protect innocent, defenseless babies from inhumane slaughtering and stop the largest genocide in history, the human baby.
Posted by FireGecko27 3 years ago
I'd just like to say, that when it comes to making laws, you can't be wishy-washy. For example, Pro, you said that only in cases where it was rape, or the mother's health was in danger, should abortion be legal. However, when it comes to law, you can't make exceptions, because if you do, before you know it, the law itself is powerless. Therefore, abortion is legal, or illegal. No exceptions. And, you also stated that women are not discriminated against. That is incorrect. It may not be outright, but women are being discriminated against all the time. Especially when it comes to work. For example, someone I know. She, and several other women in her workplace have worked in the travel industry for nearly 20 years, each. They all reached the highest rungs they could. They already got as high as they could. Then, out of nowhere, a man, with only about 2 years experience comes in, and is automatically making more money. When they asked why he was making more, their boss said, "he has a family to support". Well that's interesting, because all of the women in that office had families to support. Some in fact, were even single parents. And one last thing. You can easily say, "Well, they shouldn't have done it, now they have to live through the consequences". However, its pretty easy as a teenager, to make mistakes. Sometimes, they are tricked into it. Sometimes, they were drunk or doing drugs, but either way, it doesn't matter because when your a teenager, a lot of things are going on, and your still developing mentally, physically, and psychologically. So, overall, teens, people, make mistakes. And forcing them to live out the consequences and live out a miserable life? It'd be hell, for child and adult. Wouldn't it be better to have the abortion, and have them learn from their lesson? Its easy to say what they should and shouldn't do, but your not in their shoes, you have no idea what its like. You don't have the right to legalize the rights to their own bodies. Thanks.
This debate has 2 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.