The Instigator
asta
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
DrAnomaly
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Should abortion be legal in any situations?

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 3/27/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 628 times Debate No: 111757
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)

 

asta

Con

Anyone who wants to debate me on this is encouraged to put their points in the format that I'm putting them in so it's organized. New bullet points may be added if necessary. NO TROLLS ALOUD.

1) Science has confirmed that a fetus is a person. A fetus has all the necessary chromosomes to be alive and a fetus meets all the necessary criteria to be alive.
2) Statement 1 is not an opinion, it is a fact. An opinion does not have evidence whereas science does.
3) Most reasons why a woman would want an abortion (can't afford a child, caring for the child would get in the way of school, etc) can be solved with adoption.
DrAnomaly

Pro

I accept. I however do not understand your first argument. It seems to be a non-sequitur? How does your conclusion follow from your premises???
Debate Round No. 1
asta

Con

Although it's not in the conventional format, I was trying to say some pro life claims. If you disagreed with these claims, I was suggesting that you can reply to them in the existing format they are in.

I hope this makes sense and I apologize if what I'm saying doesn't make sense.

Alec Stanton
DrAnomaly

Pro

I think I understand.

So for proposition (1) "Science has confirmed that a fetus is a person. A fetus has all the necessary chromosomes to be alive and a fetus meets all the necessary criteria to be alive." So? Why does being alive matter??? Mosquito are alive, however it is not immoral to kill them.

and as for proposition (3), This is an example of the is/ought fallacy. Just because a consequence of an action is manageable does not mean that the action is moral/immoral.

Also, if abortion is NOT immoral, then it is immoral to use force to stop abortion, and visa-versa.
Debate Round No. 2
asta

Con

(1) I don't kill mosquitoes. A mosquito is HUGELY different from a person.

A young baby may be more scary to a woman than a fetus; a woman actually sees the baby eating her via sucking her breast (unless baby formula is used). Does this mean it is okay to kill this young baby if the woman does not like the baby sucking on her breast, especially since their is baby formula for the baby, as their is adoption for the fetus?

(3 or 2) I didn't say every reason. I said most reasons. The reasons why many people want abortions are:

-"My family told me too. They won't pay for him"
-"It gets in the way of school"
-"A child is too expensive"
-"My boyfriend won't care for it"
-"I got raped"

And they ALL can be solved with adoption.

P.S. You were original. I wasn't expecting a mosquito analogy. You were probably the most respectful person I've communicated online too about this. I await your responses to the bullet points.
DrAnomaly

Pro

The big question here is, what is the prime attribute that separates a mosquito from a person? Once we are able to identify this attribute, then we'll be able to find out whether or not this attribute is applicable to fetuses (or potentially even other animals, but we'll save that for a different time)

I would agree that killing a child is wrong, but the question we must ask is why? If we know why it is wrong to kill a child, or a grown person, then we'll be able to deduce whether or not this applies to a fetus as well.

Most reasons people get abortions can be solved by adoption. I agree.
Debate Round No. 3
asta

Con

A mosquito has different chromosomes from a human being. A human being has 23 pairs of chromosomes whereas a mosquito has only 3 pairs (https://en.wikipedia.org...). More chromosomes in an animal doesn't always mean better or superior. That would be like saying that a big speech is always better than a small speech. A small speech that is good is better than a boring 3 hour presentation and an engaging 3 hour presentation is better than a small speech about something that doesn't make sense.

So a fetus has not only the same number of chromosomes as a human, but it also contains it's chromosomes in the same format as a human. Other animals with 46 chromosomes don't contain the same format for their chromosomes. It would be like 2 speeches with the same amount of paragraphs, but the amount of sentences in each paragraph is different. This is one thing that separates humans from animals like the Sable antelope.

It is wrong to kill a human (with few exceptions) because almost none of us would like it if we were killed. This applies to a fetus because a fetus would not want to be killed. If a 7 year old doesn't want to get shots, which only make a small prick in their skin, a fetus would not want to be killed which sheds much more blood.
DrAnomaly

Pro

Your argument in a syllogism would be:

P1. Killing a being with human genetic information is murder/immoral
P2. A fetus has human genetic information
C . Therefor, killing a fetus is murder/immoral

I would like to challenge premise one. Why is killing being with genetic information wrong/immoral? Moreover, if we found an alien race, or even another species of great ape, such as ourselves, then would it be morally permissible to kill them, even though they were conscious, capable of reasoning, and compassion?

Also, as for your second argument

P1. It is immoral to go against the universal preference humans hold
P2. Not being killed in universally preferable among all people
C . Therefor, it is immoral to kill

I'd like to challenge premise one. Why ought we follow these preferences?
Debate Round No. 4
asta

Con

It would be wrong to kill humans with the human chromosomes because the chromosomes confirm whether or not someone is a human and if an organism meets the criteria for life, then it is alive. Just like it would be wrong to

It would not be moral to kill a smart alien species or another ape race unless in genuine individual or national defense or as a punishment for a crime.

About your second argument:
I do not understand it. It seems to be a non-sequitur? How does your second point follow from your premises?
DrAnomaly

Pro

My second argument wasn't an argument. It was asking you to substantiate the premises of your argument.

"It would be wrong to kill humans with the human chromosomes because the chromosomes confirm whether or not someone is a human and if an organism meets the criteria for life, then it is alive. Just like it would be wrong to" - Why?

"It would not be moral to kill a smart alien species or another ape race unless in genuine individual or national defense or as a punishment for a crime." - Why?

5 rounds is not near enough for us to actually come to a conclusion, and we may never. There might not be an answer to our question... Wanna do another 5 rounds?
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by asta 3 years ago
asta
+DrAnomaly
Additional rounds can be discussed in the comments.
Posted by asta 3 years ago
asta
God save the unborn.
Posted by John_C_1812 3 years ago
John_C_1812
1. Conception is the beginning of life. The admission to murder can take place before or after life starts.
2. The admission is also detailing life has officially started.
3. There is never any reason given to justify that all woman must admit to a crime.
4. There is never an alibi for the public asked to participate in the admitted crime.
5. A witness can just as easily say a woman has had a Female Specific Amputation and lied about the abortion.
6. Bringing a group of people together under a United State of crime is itself a crime.
Posted by asta 3 years ago
asta
The same way the law forces people not to murder, rape, steal, etc, by punishing woman for killing unborn fetuses.
Posted by missmedic 3 years ago
missmedic
Hey law enforcement, how do you make a women have a baby she does not want to have? How would you do that?
No votes have been placed for this debate.

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