Abortion Should be Legal
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: | 7 Point | ||
Started: | 1/7/2020 | Category: | Politics | ||
Updated: | 2 years ago | Status: | Post Voting Period | ||
Viewed: | 464 times | Debate No: | 123814 |
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)
Women deserve the right to decide whether or not they give birth to a baby.
I agree that women have the right to give or not to give birth to a baby. But that's not what you are arguing for. You are arguing that killing the baby is an option. I am for the choices of motherhood, Adoption, Contraception or abstinence. What I am not for is murdering the baby. And the baby is in fact a human life. If you contest this, Please state the line you draw between a life and not a life. Thanks |
![]() |
Well, The whole of the argument of abortion is on when a fetus becomes a baby. The liberal argument is not that women should be able to kill their own babies, Its that their not quite human yet, And that's the one I'll be defending. Fetuses are not really children until they gain a conscience. Aborting a baby when it's just when the sperm's touched the egg is silly because its essentially saying that it should be illegal for women to not carry children, Meaning all women should be permanently pregnant or their "killing children" by preventing them from existing. There needs to be a line drawn between killing and preventing from existing, And the general consensus is after 12-20 weeks, The fetus becomes an actual child and aborting it would be murder.
"Fetuses are not really children until they gain a conscience. " But if the line we draw between a life and not a life is whether is has conciouness, That would mean that your life wouldn't matter if you were in a coma. If you were in a coma could I stab you? I could not, Because the definition of human life is not whether you have conciousness or not. Is a person in a coma a person then? Their brains aren't functional, They are braindead. Why not kill them? "Aborting a baby when it's just when the sperm's touched the egg is silly because its essentially saying that it should be illegal for women to not carry children, Meaning all women should be permanently pregnant or their "killing children" by preventing them from existing. " An egg and a sperm alone are not human beings. There is a difference between preventing children from existing and killing them, And that line I draw at conception, When the egg and the sperm combine to create a DNA (literally everything you are) absolutely and completely unique from anyone else's in the universe. That is when the human being is created, That is where I draw the line. Feel free to dispute the opinion I have drawn over the facts of the matter. "the general consensus is after 12-20 weeks, The fetus becomes an actual child and aborting it would be murder. " I am glad you are against late term abortions. Though, The country is split about 50 50 on whether abortion should be completely illegal or not. There is no general consensus on that among the population, Or even doctors. |
![]() |
"If you were in a coma could I stab you? I could not, Because the definition of human life is not whether you have conciousness or not. " The difference between a fetus without conscious and a person in a coma is that the later has lived a life and their brain is a defined personality that has grown and developed. A fetus doesn't even have a brain and could not be classified as a human because of that. They don't even have the potential to think and therefore are not human beings. "When the egg and the sperm combine to create a DNA (literally everything you are) absolutely and completely unique from anyone else's in the universe. " Both the egg and sperm cells contain DNA, So I'm assuming you draw the line when they connect to make one pair that becomes the fetus. At this point, It's technically only a single cell. By aborting it, You wouldn't be killing anything because it doesn't have the capacity to think, Feel or care like a normal human. This single-cell lacks almost anything you'd define as the characteristics of a human. I apologize for my wording on the final quote, I meant the consensus of people who support abortions still bans abortions on late-term.
"The difference between a fetus without conscious and a person in a coma is that the later has lived a life and their brain is a defined personality that has grown and developed. " Your definition of a human life has changed. First it was whether or not the baby had consciousness. Now you have changed it to "the person in a coma was a life before, Therefore it is a human life. " The only reason you cannot kill the person in the coma, In your own words, Is because it has potential to have consciousness again. That is the key point. A baby has the potential to have consciousness too, The same potential. A fetus doesn't even have a brain and could not be classified as a human because of that. They don't even have the potential to think and therefore are not human beings. And yet you still cannot justify killing a braindead person. The braindead person will have his thinking prowess and consciousness back again, Just as the baby will. "You wouldn't be killing anything because it doesn't have the capacity to think, Feel or care like a normal human. This single-cell lacks almost anything you'd define as the characteristics of a human. " None of these characteristics you have just described would apply to a braindead person. None. Why? Because it has the potential to have all these characteristics. Just like a human baby. Thanks for an awesome, Productive debate. |
![]() |
No votes have been placed for this debate.
Woman never receive pregnancy abortions after sexual assaults, This may be seen a s a freedom of speech, The process taking place is a female specific amputations a termination is made on an immigration across an international border which is in proximity to all woman who are capable of giving birth.
When arguing when abortions can become legal a legal precedent already set under United State Constitution dictated that the privacy must be a dominate consideration for all woman. Pregnancy abortion already fail that requirement. All woman must be created equal under law in a way that does not require a unconstitutional self-incrimination exposing a loss of privacy.