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

Should Women Have the Right of Abortion?

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
ThotDestroyer97 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: 12/15/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 564 times Debate No: 105877
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)




In this argument, the con (me) is arguing that the women do not have the right of abortion while pro is for women to have the right of abortion. I understand that is a very sensitive subject and I ask that whoever accepts this challenge stays cordial.

Keep in mind that "even though I may disagree with what you say, I will fight to the very death for you to have the right to say it."

Here is my argument:
I believe in women's rights and that women should have the same rights as men, but if a woman get pregnant, then she is carrying another human being all together. When it comes to aborting babies, it is murder.
But another question is when does life begin? Christianity believes that life begins at conception. Science believe life is continues meaning there is no beginning to life.
What about human life? There is no definite answer but my personal definition would be at conception.
What about rape or forced pregnancy? Rape is wrong and is rightfully looked down opon. But aborting a baby because the woman was raped is still murder. But the father (if proved to have raped the woman) should have his rights to see his child denied and have to pay for the process of adoption.
Yes, adoption is a hard and costly process, but the system can be approved, there are organizations that help women put their babies up for adoption and help the baby get to the new parents.

The most common abortion process is where the doctor put a suction tube in the uterus and ripped apart the baby and pulls the baby through the tube. The process is just gruesome and is wrong.


The fact of the matter is simple, you are basing your argument off of the fact that it is morally wrong and is "murder". This in many ways invalidates your argument as one could simply ask the question, "Is it ethical to take away the universal rights of a person that include being able to do what they want with their body?" As for the option of adoption, it would be very difficult to find someone who would adopt a baby from an incestuous origin. Why may I say this? Well it's because a lot of abortions worldwide are due to rape, disease, or incest. I'm tired so i'm not gonna finish. ^_^
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting my debate! But I do have numerous things wrongs with your counter:

Murder is the unjustified killing of at least one human being by another human being, so that doesn't invalidate my previous argument.

And "a person should be able to do what they want with their body" is invalid in this case because when the sperm and the egg cell combine (conception) to form the zygote, that cell has different DNA than the woman's DNA, therefore the unborn baby is not part of the woman's body.

In the United States, there is an estimated 2 million couples wanting to adopt babies and 1.3 million abortion every year, so there is no shortage of people wanting to adopt.

Within 8 weeks of an abortion, about 55% experience guilt, 44% complained of nervous disorders, and 31% regretted their decision.
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
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Bitch_Goddess 3 years ago
The fetus is taking nutrients from the woman's' body. Therefore, in order to prevent the nutrients from being taken, she can remove the fetus and, in turn, it would end up killing it anyway. So it really is her body, her choice. She has every right to do what she wants to her body, and if that includes kicking out an unwelcomed guest feeding off of her nutrients, it's a valid reason.
Posted by ThotDestroyer97 3 years ago
also youre wrong about 250 million faggot
Posted by ThotDestroyer97 3 years ago
1:where is your source and
2: The Crusades: 6,000,000
Thirty Years War: 11,500,000
French Wars of Religion: 4,000,000
Second Sudanese Civil War: 2,000,000
Lebanese Civil War: 250,000
Muslim Conquests of India: 80,000,000
Congolese Genocide (King Leopold II): 13,000,000
Armenian Genocide: 1,500,000
Rwandan Genocide: 800,000
Eighty Years' War: 1,000,000
Nigerian Civil War: 1,000,000
Great Peasants' Revolt: 250,000
First Sudanese Civil War: 1,000,000
Jewish Diaspora (Not Including the Holocaust): 1,000,000
The Holocaust (Jewish and Homosexual Deaths): 6,500,000
Islamic Terrorism Since 2000: 150,000
Iraq War: 500,000
US Western Expansion (Justified by "Manifest Destiny"):20,000,000
Atlantic Slave Trade (Justified by Christianity): 14,000,000
Aztec Human Sacrifice: 80,000
AIDS deaths in Africa largely due to opposition to condoms: 30,000,000
Spanish Inquisition: 5,000
TOTAL: 195,035,000 deaths in the name of religion. Source: Various websites on death counts
Posted by Historybuff01 3 years ago
do u know the largest genocide in history? Abortion, 250 million have been terminated since the 1970s in the US.
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.