The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
10 Points

abortion should be legal and not be shamed

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/5/2017 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,115 times Debate No: 105564
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (2)




I come along people that find abortion "evil" and "sinful" but, I disagree. is a women, or a couple is not fit to be a parent, its better to abort it that give the child a life that could be tough. woman that have had an abortion should not be shamed.


Thanks for instigating this debate. I zealously take the opposite position on the matter, being persuaded that "abortion," (which I will often, for the sake of accuracy, refer to as the murdering of a preborn child), is quite evil and sinful. The mere concept that it may not be evil could only be considered from a point of subjective morality, which is quite problematic, in and of itself, but that's another debate altogether.
As for the point concerning unfit parents, adoption is absolutely a better option for all parties involved, (the mother, the father, the baby, and the loving adopting family,) barring some infinitesimally small percentage of cases that cause life-threatening deliveries for the mother.
All lives are tough. Your reasoning on a tough life rendering one better off dead, is very inconsistent... That is, unless you advocate for mercy killing everyone whose circumstances include some degree of discomfort.
Shame is one method by which society encourages good behavior.
Debate Round No. 1


adopting is not always a smart idea, statistics show that a number of children that are adopted become destructive mentally. It is unthinkable that 19 Russian children have been murdered by American adopters, in addition to untold other adopted children surviving unspeakable abuse.
you saying "murder of a preborn children" is quite In-valid. a fetus does not become human until the 24th or 28th week. it is not murder if it is not human. it is no different that stepping on a spider or cutting down a tree.


You should list your sources for those statistics, but I'll assume their accuracy for argument's sake. Yes... Some adopted children become "destructive mentally"... But, so do children and adults from all backgrounds.
19 russian children killed by adoptors is certainly a tragedy, but it pales in comparison to the 2700 babies killed by abortionists each day, just in the US alone, according to, which also states, "Abortion increases breast cancer risks, other health risks, and leads to serious emotional consequences.Also, '421 women have died as a result of legal abortion.'"
And the debate as to whether or not these babies are somehow less than human is a whole other debate, but i will address the "no different than stepping on a spider or cutting down a tree" remark... Do we step on adult spiders and cut down mature trees? Yes... But, we don't murder humans... Or at least, we all know murdering people is evil... But cutting down a tree is not.
Debate Round No. 2


it is quite heart breaking that so many women die during legal abortions, but if abortions were illegal, it would not stop them, and women seeking an abortion would find one by unsafe and illegal means, so it is best to provide a safe and legal means of abortion.

wikipedia states that unsafe and illegal abortions symptoms include, but are not limited too: abdominal pain, vaginal infection, abnormal vaginal bleeding and shock.

women have abortions to choose when to have children based on their age, financial stability and relationship stability. It is not the government's position to legislate against women's choices.

The fetus is like a dead brain without self-awareness or consciousness, so it's actually dead.

Abortion prevents unnecessary unplanned pregnancies and prevents children from neglecting because their mothers did not want to have that child at that time.

Many women who choose abortion don't have the financial resources to support to raise him or her.


I wonder if your, "they'll do it anyway, so we better make it legal and shame-free" logic extends to gun rights, or bodily autonomy concerning vaccination... But that's irrelevant.

I would side with science, and say that the most benign and effective means of contraception is abstinence. Sex is primarily for procreation, and is designed to be enjoyed by a man and a woman within the confines and commitment of marriage. All other forms of sex come with a litany of problems. A traditional family is ideal for a child's development and care... Your argument is convenience over life... You embrace the selfish nature of people, rather than encouraging individual responsibility for our actions.
In closing, choices have consequences, (including the choice to mate.) Make your choice before the sex. A fetus is neither dead, nor an insect, nor a plant. It is a human, with its own DNA from conception. Abortion doesn't PREVENT anything. Abortion terminates a life that would have otherwise been.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by SlowDMO 2 years ago
Coolbeans, is debate itself not two people arguing the legitimacy of their differing beliefs on a matter?
Do you think religious beliefs should be, or even can be separated from a debate? I understand that my opponent may not grant the Bible the same authority that I do... But they should accept that planned parenthood, sociology textbooks, and even the state, itself, are not authoritative sources in my view...
Also, no one can "impose" their religion on another, and my freedom to proclaim what i believe to be true to my fellow man, combined with their right to disagree, is what freedom of religion is.
Posted by coolbeans3213 2 years ago
It also seems illogical to impose your religious beliefs onto a stranger who has a completely different set of experiences as you. Talk about "freedom of religion" while having other people"s religion unwillingly imposed on you because a few zealots don"t have the capacity to understand that what other people do in their lives is their choice and theirs alone. :(
Posted by SlowDMO 2 years ago
Have you only ever read planned parenthood publications? That is the only reason i can think of, for someone to actually believe that b.s. You know those graphic images that the pro-life demonstrators
are always waving around? Those are depicting 6-9 week old babies that have been murdered... The reason the anti-life people, like yourself, are so offended by the images is because they, "make it look like murder"... Well, it looks like murder, because it is... A mother choosing to abort acts out of pure selfishness... No parent is ever "ready", financially or emotionally, to bring a human life into the world, and be responsible for that life... You and I deserve death more than these innocent life... There is no intellect offered by your side... Just ill will, selfishness, and an effort to make it look like a caring "choice"... The government is not supposed to make our choices for us, but they are to protect our rights... Among these rights are "LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... Not listed: the right to choose to kill.
Posted by Bitch_Goddess 2 years ago
I'm curious as to where you received this false information.
Fetus' are incapable of feeling pain until their pain receptors develop, which is around 20-24 weeks. Therefore, it is completely impossible for a fetus to feel pain at 12 weeks, since their brain hasn't even developed brainwaves yet.
Posted by Bitch_Goddess 2 years ago
Many women got/get illegal abortions because they are unprepared, mentally and/or financially. Or maybe too young. While going through with birth would be the safest position for women physically, illegalizing abortion would cause thousands of women to be put in unsafe situations out of mere desperation. And likely cause serious issues for their mental health. There's a reason for abortions.
Stating "It's safer just not to get one" is an incredibly lousy argument. Of course, it's physically safer, comparing. However, the idea that women would rather go through pregnancy pains as well as morning sickness for months- only to give up the baby in the end- than getting rid of the organism before it becomes a fully-developed, living human being is just an illusion you're creating for yourself.
Illegalizing abortion would be in no one's favor. Abortions would still happen but in more dangerous situations for the woman. I'd rather women have the opportunity to have a safe, welcoming environment for when they go in and make this very big decision than risking everything on unclean tools and shady people who are likely unlicensed and untrained.
Honestly, one has to be incredibly oblivious and ignorant of how much pregnancy can strain and negatively affect an unprepared person (especially on their mentality) to believe that illegalizing abortion would actually be a good thing.
Posted by Danielt123 2 years ago
Okay, so first of all abortion is not a good solution to any situation, if you think just because someone could have a tough life that they should be killed in cold blood. And I know there will be someone who will say, what if they are raped, well the cause for abortion as rape is less then 1%. Lastly if you think it's a painless death go ahead and look up how an abortion is preformed, and might I add that about 84% of planned parent hood abortions are at or past 12 weeks which is when the baby can begin feeling pain
Posted by DawnBringerRiven 2 years ago
@ Goddess The safest method for women to take is just not having an abortion and going through with the birth. Birth resulting in death is a much lower chance than abortion (illegal or legal) resulting in death.
Posted by Bitch_Goddess 2 years ago
There is a significant difference between gun rights and abortion. Preventing a ban on abortion would create a safer environment for the woman. Banning guns...? Well, if Pro is against guns rights, then it would make sense if Pro thought that that was the best solution. (Though, It's really not)

The idea that sex is primarily for procreation is a faulty idea. While that may be YOUR reason for acting in sexual intercourse, that is not the reason for millions- if not billions- of other people. Deciding whether or not having sex is mainly for pleasure or having children is a personal decision that you must make; however, your decision does not mean that it is the same for everyone else. For example, should I choose to have intercourse with my partner, it would be for pleasure. That is the primary purpose of me having intercourse because I chose it to be that way. YOURS is so that one day, you may have children. That is your primary reason.
It depends on the person, not people as an entirety.

I'd also suggest you take a look at the mortality rate of women when abortion was illegal. It's much higher than legal abortion- in which is the safest method for women to take.

I'm actually kind of laughing a little atm.
Going back to what you first said, why do you believe abortion should be made illegal, yet you are pro-gun? After all, "illegalizing it won't make it go away", right? In fact, illegalizing it would make it MORE unsafe for women. So you'd rather have women in a situation where they have to risk their lives (in more ways than one, due to improper and dirty equipment, the risk of being raped, kidnapped, physically assaulted, etc.) than be provided with a safe, comfortable place to have the abortion performed (the people who work in abortion clinics are usually the kindest and wonderful people I've met). Either way, if the woman is not prepared to have a child, she will more than likely go through any means necessary to get an abortion out of fear and a
Posted by John_C_1812 2 years ago
Abortion is a self-incriminating confession to murder. Irresponsible of this type of choice making does not insure that a crime has by fact ever taken place with the limit of that woman"s pregnancy. It however does create a disqualification form full United States Constitutional protection when abortion of a pregnancy is asking all people to take part in a felony criminal confession. This action is done without protection granted by full understanding of all the reasons behind a choice.

The opportunity for public human sacrifice is being offered. This to many is a justifiable reason to accuse anyone of evil. The justification of questioning the overall application of abortion is challenged by defending the United States Constitution with an opposing witness account Gender Specific Amputation. Do these three words describe the Civil War waged on United States Constitution selfish? There is a line between the need for public approval and liberty.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Deonatus 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Spelling and grammar: Unlike Con, Pro almost entirely lacked proper capitalization/punctuation and had several typos (or wrong words) that significantly damaged the flow of their argument making it hard to read. Convincing arguments: 1) Pro's argument assumed that fetuses/zygote are not living but only supported this with the claim that unless an organism is self-aware or has brain activity, it is not living. Which, as Pro pointed out was factually incorrect because it is still an organism with human DNA. (Not all living organisms have brains) 2) Pro's central argument that due to the less ideal circumstances of an unwanted fetus/zygote, it's better to kill/abort it. To support this Pro pointed to harms associated with being adopted or being raised in a financially unstable home. Con however rebutted this by suggesting that the logic used would justify mercy killings to which Pro only attempted to refute with the unproven claim that an fetus/zygote is not being a living organism.
Vote Placed by DawnBringerRiven 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not give sources for any of the statistics or events they used in their claims, making their argument less credible. Since Pro did not meet their Burden of Proof, I believe this makes Con's arguments more convincing by default. Con's arguments included one source (concernedwomen .org) while Pro's did not include any sources, so I gave the source point to Con. The conduct is tied as both were respectful. Pro commonly started sentences without capitalization and used the singular and plural form of woman incorrectly. "is a women..." "woman that have had..." For this reason I gave Con the spelling and grammar point.

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