Abortion
Why should people be allowed to abort babies? Why should people not be allowed to abort babies?
Pro-Choice
Side Score: 20
|
 |
Pro-Life
Side Score: 7
|
|
|
|
|
4
points
2
points
The big picture being that this entire issue is not black and white. But isn't it? You either are for woman being able to choose to abort a fetus, or you're against it. Being for abortion in the case of rape or incest is completely inconsistent. Why would a pro-lifer be for killing an innocent baby in an incident of rape, whereas if the woman conceived a baby with her consent, she is absolutely forbidden to abort the baby because it's murder. Why the double standard and inconsistency? Side: Pro-Life
3
points
But isn't it? It's not. The popular positions are, but the clear answer is not. Being for abortion in the case of rape or incest is completely inconsistent. Why would a pro-lifer be for killing an innocent baby in an incident of rape, whereas if the woman conceived a baby with her consent, she is absolutely forbidden to abort the baby because it's murder. Because pro-life and pro-choice are idiotic. People can say they're pro-life because they don't know what else to say, but if they take a neutral stance they're better off then being rigidly pro-life. I'll admit it's silly for them to call themselves pro-life when they are not, but they're still being smart to try and go for a middle man. It's not necessarily their fault culture requires that they pick a side. Being neutral can be hard. Why the double standard and inconsistency? I'm not saying it's perfect. If you start with a flawed, rigid, one-sided position you're likely to not get much of anywhere. That's why I will never label myself pro-life or pro-choice, honestly. But that's also why these two extreme should at least have a middle man for middle-man opinions. Saying that we should pick pro-choice or pro-life, which this debate forces, is ridiculous. It encourages ignorance. Side: Pro-Choice
A women should be able to choose what happens with her body, especially concerning abortion and babies. Not because I support abortion, but what if you were the child of a mom? What if that mom only had you grudgingly because she was forced to have you, abortions being outlawed? Would you really want to grow up unloved? A child who's own mother would have aborted you? Worse than an accident, you are a person whom the people you are supposed to love, and are supposed to love you would rather have had you dead than given birth to you. In reality, it's not that bad, but forcing a mother to give birth to an unwanted child is cruel, and with the human population this high, with plenty of orphans already, why make more? Why go to the trouble and the pain for the mother, and the child, the entire family, and the whole world, when abortion could be an option? I support safe sex and planned pregnancy, I think abortion is murder, as is war or any human killing another human, but killing does happen. Every time you eat, you are eating something that was killed, plant or animal. If it reduces pain in the world, then you should be able to abort. Side: Pro-Choice
2
points
Seek the truth, not what you want the truth to be. That's why I'm not religious. Which religion? All say to believe, yet why? Must I believe or can I just not believe? It's why I follow science and logic. To me, to be logical is to reduce pain in the world, increase happiness, and gain knowledge, while being safe and helping people. That is why I must be pro-life AND pro-choice. I cannot force others to my opinion, just as others cannot force me, because it is only an opinion. Normally, I am against killing, but a fetus is a lot different than a fully grown human, or even a child. Anyways, I try to aim for objective truth in an objective world, so unless you believe in the supernatural, or things that can't be proven, my opinion, I've noted is almost always 100% correct, or consistent with my logic/morals. Happiness, freedom and knowledge are important to me, and on a debate forum, they should be to you too! Have a nice day. =D Side: Pro-Choice
2
points
Well, I think very grey here. The deal is that at the end of the day, if you had an abortion, well you just killed a future human being. It doesn't matter when conception is or when YOU think that baby actually turned into a real human being. You just killed a life, a future. So yes, at the end of the day... Abortion is essentially murder. However, I think that under any circumstance, a woman should be able to abort her own baby. A woman has her right to her body, it is going to be her pain and her blood and tears going into this young's life. If a woman strongly believes that she isn't prepared for parenthood then she has the right to her own body. It is also the right to her mind. Abortion is not easy, just like any type of surgery it leaves scars. Not only the physical ones but also the mental ones. Women have to deal with the thought of the murder of their own child for the rest of her life. She has to think of the suffering of that child and the pain of her child... That was never even born. Abortion is also risky, woman and their... Umm...... "companions"/companion..... Should talk over the risks of the surgery and the abortion itself. Side: Pro-Choice
Does it not go against all reason that person A should have the right to kill person B, if person A finds person B's continued existence to be inconvenient? A woman may have a right to her body, but by choosing abortion she's affecting the rights of another persons body as well - the child's. And mental trauma from the abortion is no fitting punishment for murder. We don't let people freely walk away from unwillingly killing other people just because they feel bad about it. Side: Pro-Life
Abortion is a really tricky subject to navigate, because on one side you are saying, " Killing an unborn child is wrong!" or "Women have the right to decide what happens with there own body!". The problem is that people can agree with both statements at the same time. If you want an abortion because you don't think you are ready to support a child because of your youth you have a valid point. Daughters of teen moms are 22% more likely to become teen moms than their peers. Sons of teen moms are 13% more likely to go to prison than their peers. Not to mention the impact on the teen moms themselves. Less than 35% of teen moms finish high school, and only 1.5% of teen moms get there degree by age 30. I am pro-choice because i don't think it is just to force someone into those statistics. Side: Pro-Choice
2
points
THERE IS A MIDDLE HERE!! you can be pro-life but also believe people have the right to choose. For Christians who are all pro-life you need to remember that according to your faith God knew what that girl was going to do when he put that baby in her belly. He put it there anyway. If we take that girls right away to choose for herself girls will be choosing life because they were forced to not because they chose that it was the right thing to do. You are eliminating an opportunity for her to find God by making that decision on her own. Side: Pro-Choice
1
point
If someone is a strict constructionist who interprets the Constitution word for word, the sanction for abortion is given under the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Fourteenth Amendment of our U.S. Constitution defines a citizen “a citizen” at birth. If a woman is carrying a fetus in the womb, the U.S. Constitution does not designate the fetus as “a citizen.” It would take an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to declare a fetus a citizen. You have to be born in order to be recognized as a citizen. Therefore, a woman does have the right to choose. A fetus inside the womb is not designated as a citizen according to the U.S. Constitution so by default is not entitled to life, liberty, or prosperity. You have to be born in order to be endowed with those privileges. To conclude, neither the Federal government nor any of the States can deny a woman the right to choose.
If abortion is murder, abortion would have been terminated years ago due to the cruel and unusual punishment clause under the Eighth Amendment. Again, proof that a fetus is not recognized as a citizen of the United States of America. Side: Pro-Choice
|
This question has far greater implications. Are there such things as inalienable rights - human rights? The right to life for example? If there are, then there are two possibilites: 1. Humans obtain their inalienable rights purely by being a human being. From the moment of conception, a distinct human being, with its own unique genetic signature, has been given rise - thus from the moment of conception a human being starts to exist and as such, with conception the inalienable rights are also given to the human merely for existing as a human being. 2. We start bartering and haggling. When does a human get rights, what rights, which humans should get them etc etc. But if we conclude with this option, then there is no real reason to limit ourselves to the unborn - Nazi Germany is a very modern example of a nation haggling with these inalienable rights on born human beings. So first of all, we need to see what implications rise from the views and ideas to which we have attached ourselves to. Now that you've thought about these implications, lets look at abortion from an honest perspective - it's the termination of the life of a developing human being for the sake of perserving the convenience and the satisfaction of another person. This is against all reason. Convenience does not justify the termination of another human's life - murder. The parents are generally always responsible for the creation of the fetus, so they should have the moral obligation to support the life of that fetus. If they do not want the child, they can give him/her up for adoption - adoption is not some myth. We must also strive for the creation of institutions that would take care of unwanted children in a loving, productive environment. Murder is not an acceptable alternative for a civilized nation. Given the fact that pregnancy lasts 9 months, one needs to ask themselves - Is murder justified by temporary inconvenience? For the sake of comparison, think of the USA, 1800 - the question of slavery. Some of you may object, but the general rethoric at the time was completely the same - Blacks are not fully human, thus they have no rights ; We should not force our opinions on other people, lets respect our freedom to choose ; We are not ready for such an extensive protection of human rights, we need to go step by step etc etc. Nowaydays we laugh and ridicule such arguments as we see it self-evidently that slavery is immoral and I'm convinced that 100 years from now, we'll be seeing abortion in the same light. As abortion does not affirm to my vision of what an ethical, civilized nation should be like - I'm forced to subscribe to the pro-life position. Side: Pro-Life
1
point
"1. Humans obtain their inalienable rights purely by being a human being. From the moment of conception, a distinct human being, with its own unique genetic signature, has been given rise - thus from the moment of conception a human being starts to exist and as such, with conception the inalienable rights are also given to the human merely for existing as a human being. …. The parents are generally always responsible for the creation of the fetus, so they should have the moral obligation to support the life of that fetus. If they do not want the child, they can give him/her up for adoption - adoption is not some myth. We must also strive for the creation of institutions that would take care of unwanted children in a loving, productive environment. Murder is not an acceptable alternative for a civilized nation." Aren't the parents responsible for the death of thier baby? If you do believe that the baby is a human being at the point of conception then consider this… Every woman that has ever had any abortion and any father who has helped their “companion” through the abortion has to live with the fact that they killed their baby. Almost everyone here agrees (at least on your side) that a baby is a human being, some will even saw that at fertilization they are a human being. So acknowledging that fact… “How do you think the woman feels?” Its not as if she doesn’t get emotionally damaged after such. She has to live with (what you would suggest) murder. As a "civilized organization" we should understand the reasons for people doing the things they do and accept them for themselves and their actions. As a "civilized organization" we should know about these things.... knowing that more gruesome and harsh ways to pass happen everyday. As a "civilized organization" we should understand that it is their choice to do these things... and if we dont agree we try to talk them out of it (if that doesn't work then that is thier subject to work out). Other people have no right to impose their views on us, if we make a “bad decision” or “something in spite of god” then let the penalty fall onto us… I’m sure if we were all really “civilized” we’d understand. "Given the fact that pregnancy lasts 9 months, one needs to ask themselves - Is murder justified by temporary inconvenience?" No, to think that a baby is a "temporary inconvienience" would be wrong. The judgement in most abortions is this... "How can I support this baby?" "How can I afford it?" "How will I raise it?" The parents dont think on a "this is now" basis they also think of the larger picture and how the baby will be affected. Not to mention… going through the system is tough for kids. Side: Pro-Choice
1
point
I'm kinda in the middle. I don't think raped women should be forced to have their babies, if they get pregnant. And also, I think we should prioritize the mother instead of the child. If the mothers life is in danger if she has the baby, I think she should abort the baby. Side: Pro-Life
|
