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

Should abortion be legal in any situations?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Envisage has forfeited round #3.
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: Select Winner
Started: 4/29/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 835 times Debate No: 113267
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)




The 1st round is acceptance to the debate. By accepting, you agree to publish all 5 rounds unless you couldn't access your computer. No forfeiting allowed.

In the 1st round, you just state your position on the topic.

Mine is I believe abortion should be illegal in all situations.


I accept. Best of luck.

In response to Pro"s request that I state my position, sure:

Abortion should be permitted in all situations. All the way up until the moment childbirth. I will argue for as diametric extreme position as possible.

I don"t actually hold this position in practice, but defending it will be the most useful for addressing the key concepts behind abortion.
Debate Round No. 1


Abortion is wrong because it kills an innocent human being. Despite the pro life movement being stereotyped as a religious movement, there is significant science that also sais that a fetus, and even a zygote is a human being.

According to high school biology, a fetus has all the necessary chromosomes to be alive and they meet all the necessary criteria for life (the 8 characteristics of Life) from the moment of conception. A fetus is therefore a living human being and killing them should be illegal.



I will put forth my own arguments this round and rebut in later rounds

Removal of an Inconvenience

Childbird is a major inconvenience on the mother. The foetus consumes calories and nutrients from the mother, and essentially is a parasite to its mother host. Just like any other parasite, it is something that the mother can be entitled to remove from her body.

Moreover full-term childbirth is physically strenous, exceptionally painful for the mother and often permanantly physically altering process.

To say this is an inconvenience is an understatement, and is something that should only be borne if the mother intends to keep the child, or wants to birth it and give it up. Abortion removes this issue.

The Mother takes Priority over the Foetus

The mother is a conscious human being with memories, values and experience and knowledge of pain. The mother has real-world relationships and is often within the workforce generating capital when not impregnated. The foetus is an unconscious, or minimally conscious cluster of cells/tissue without anywhere near the extent of the aforementioned qualities. These are the qualities that we tend to value for moral reasons.

Moreover, any foetus will have these qualities to a substantially lower extent than living domesticated animals for food consumption, e.g. Cows, sheep, even chickens. As a society we don't hold these to the same moral standards as a fully grown human mother would, thus why on Earth should we view a foetus as such?

Thus, the mother, who wants to get rid of the parasite/foetus, should have priority over any arbitrary cllection of human cells.

Reduces Human Population

Humans are a cancer to this planet and virtually any species that exists on it. Being the principle cause of the current mass-extinction we are in, wrecking the planet's ecosystem, filfering and polluting it's natural resources. Why on Earth would abortion be seen as anything less than a good thing in this context?
Debate Round No. 2


1)A 2 month old who nurses on a mother's breast can also be classified as a parasite, since they suck nutrients out of the mother for their own benefit, while biting the breast. Does this mean that a woman should be allowed to kill the 2 month old child, even if she can't afford to kill the child and even if the child gets killed in their sleep?

2)It is hard to bear a child; however their pain is worth much, much less then a child's life. Also the pain is temporary and their family/husband can help them endure the pain.

3)Read bullet #2

4)The Mother does not take priority over a fetus because permanent death is worth more than temporary pain that is comparable to getting kicked in the balls (

5)The mother is a conscious human being with the ability to make choices about her own destiny. If she does not want to bear a child, she simply does not have sex or if she does have sex, she can use an IUD. Just because she is smarter and more experienced than a fetus does not give the woman the right to kill them. That would be like saying that Bill Gates should be allowed to kill his child because Bill Gates is smarter and more experienced at life. Just because a fetus is conscious does not mean it is justifiable to kill them painlessly without their consent; Hitler did this to Jewish people a lot.

6) Even though a fetus is just a bundle of cells, you know what else is a bundle of cells? Adults. Science has confirmed that all adults are chemically made up of are 10 trillion cells and the food that keeps the cells alive. Therefore, adults are technically just a bundle of cells. Technically, you and I are just a bundle of cells. Does this mean is is morally justifiable to kill these innocent bundles of cells called adults? No, it does not. Just because you are a bundle of cells does not men that you also aren't a human.

7)The reason why fetuses are scientifically more valuable than a cow is because of chromosomes. A fetus has all the human chromosomes that make someone human and a cow does not. I am mostly vegan, so I don't morally support killing animals for food that I eat.

8) The fetal cells are not arbitrary. Read bullet #6.

9) Human population is growing because of Africa, India, and to a lesser extent Latin America. The west should cease to be acting like they are responsible for something they are not. In fact, the fertility rate of western countries is below replacement level, which is leaving a void that many non western countries filled.

10)Humans are great for this planet. Humanity has found more cures for diseases than every other animal species combined and we're not even the most common on the planet, even counting biomass. Humans created civilization, languages that can merge, cities, many job diversity, and when we found out that people were destroying other jungle life, many tried to cease their activity by getting things like clean alternative energy. They are also the only other species to domesticate other species deliberately for fun. The device you typed your pro choice response to was made by humanity and humans are the smartest native earthling species in the world.

11)Humans aren't even that common. For every 1 kg of human matter there are about 1,000 kg of insects alone ( Killing innocent people is not a justified solution to overpopulation. The Rwandan Genocide had a lot of that. Was it justified that 50,000 innocent people got killed if a side effect of it was that the genocide reduced over population, in the area where over population was actually happening? No.

12)Abortion barely reduced the human population of the world. In the US, 55 million fetuses get aborted every year. If all those babies were born all at once, it would only increase the world population about a year's worth, and it would only put about 17% more people within the US, from 320 million to about 390 million. Given that Europe which is about the same size has over 740 million people (, the US can easily use this higher population.

13)Moreover, the annual growth rate is slowing down (

I await pro's response.

#Vote Con
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 asta 3 years ago
You broke the forfeit rule.
Posted by asta 3 years ago
I justified why not. What's up guys?
Posted by Envisage 3 years ago
I justified why supguys.
Posted by SupGuys 3 years ago
Saying that the mother is more important than the fetus is wrong, by putting one person (or fetus, whatever you want to call it) over another it allows for other prejudice, all because of convenience. Take segregation, "Jim Crow laws are okay because it keeps me in power, which is convenient."
Posted by asta 3 years ago
Just because you need someone else to survive does not men that that person is allowed to kill you. A 5 year old kid needs 2 parents to survive similarly to how a fetus needs a mother to survive. Does that mean that the 2 parents should be allowed to kill their 5 year old daughter if it were legal to do so?
Posted by WrylyDone 3 years ago
I believe abortion is perfectly fine up until 23 weeks. After 23 weeks, a fetus is theoretically able to survive on its own. Before that, however, the fetus cannot survive on its own and has a 100% chance of death if it were to be born then. Also, if you are worried about stopping life, then you would not eat food of any sort other than chemically-made artificial drinks and such.
Posted by John_C_1812 3 years ago
Abortion is wrong because it has all woman confess to the official stopping of life, the child's life regardless of any facts that may be taking place. It is a self-incriminating confession to a felony crime. Female Specific Amputation is not demanding the public take place in the crime as accessory before and after the fact.
Posted by asta 3 years ago
Good luck to you too.
Posted by Envisage 3 years ago
I accept. Good luck.
This debate has 4 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.