CreateDebate


Debate Info

78
69
Yes No
Debate Score:147
Arguments:227
Total Votes:176
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (52)
 
 No (52)

Debate Creator

sellersjes12(22) pic



Should abortion be illegal?

Yes

Side Score: 78
VS.

No

Side Score: 69
3 points

This is murder. And murder of a young child. Enough said abortion is murder

Side: Yes
Jace(4448) Disputed
3 points

What, exactly, makes it murder?

Side: No
2 points

This is taking a child's life. The child is at an age were it is fully functional. i think that if the girl makes the mistake of getting pregnant she should not take it out on the baby. People also should remember they have family and adoption programs.

Side: Yes
ExplorerX(6) Disputed
1 point

Yes, make the mistake of getting raped. Such an easy one to make.

Side: No
foil7(344) Disputed
1 point

What about rape cases then? Did the girl want to get herself pregnant, or are you one of the rightists who think that it's the woman's fault for wearing revealing clothing and getting herself raped? Also, what if the baby is endangering the mother. Should she have to die just so a baby can be born (considering it is even alive)?

Side: No
0 points

You of course are 100% correct. Keep up the good work combatting the lies and deception from Pro Choice people.

Side: Yes
Atrag(4946) Disputed
0 points

You support a party that believes in abortion!!!!!!!!

WAKE UP!!!!!!

Side: No
Jace(4448) Disputed
0 points

An unborn human organism is not fully functional as it is literally dependent upon the body of another being. Whether there are alternatives to abortion is immaterial to whether abortion itself should be an option.

Side: No
Vermink(1943) Disputed
0 points

They're not classes as children though, it is a fetus. No pain, feeling or consciousness especially when it's still an embryo. The mother's life should always be put before that of an unborn child. The physical pain and trauma of pregnancy is not worth it just to give up the child to adoption. It is also not fair to lump the unwanted child on family.

Though I am curious. What of reasons like rape, young mothers and medical reasons? Do you still think abortion is wrong?

Side: No
NowASaint(1161) Clarified
2 points

Abortion is murder. If you were aborted, you would have been murdered and you would not be here talking stupid.

Side: Yes
2 points

This is what pro abortion supporters do to deceive the pubic and hide the inhumanity of their policies.

1) Steer the abortion conversation to life of mother and rape pregnancies. Talk about a red hearing yet this is the first thing these pro choice people will do. The GOP has allowed these exceptions since abortion was legalized yet we still hear every day from the talking heads in the Democrat party about these extreme rare cases. Lie, deceive, exaggerate, etc. all to condition the electorate to think the GOP wil deny these extreme case abortions.(by the way, rape pregnancies can be prevented from day after pills that prevent conception)

2) The next thing they do is talk about the medical name of an unborn Baby..... Fetus. By using the name Fetus, they somehow believe it changes the status of the life growing inside the mother. Somehow in their twisted thinking, a Baby that has not yet traveled through the birth canal is somehow different than it is after it is has moved down that canal. WOW, TALK ABOUT DENIAL!

3) Next they will talk about the pain level of an unborn Baby. These pro abortion people have no clue the exact time a Baby can feel pain yet they latch on to absurd claims by pro abortion groups. I am only aware of the one video of an abortion procedure(gee what a shock) around the 1st trimester time frame. The baby clearly moves away from the implements of his death. Saying it is ok to kill an unborn Baby because it supposedly can not feel pain? It's a laughable excuse. When they vote for those on the Left, they are supporting late term abortions where the baby most definitely feel pain. The GOP has tried a number of times to prevent abortions past 20 weeks(unless extreme cases) only to have the Democrat party stop them each time.

4) The next thing they do is talk about the supposed hard life these unwanted children will have if we allow them to live. So in all their God like powers, they know the future of every Baby aborted? How many great people have come from poverty or foster homes, etc.? To be so arrogant to allow the deaths of innocent life because of some perceived hard life is beyond diabolical. That's like the Nazi mentality where we only want blond haired blue eyed people being born in Germany. In all their arrogance, they will deem who is deservng of life. To all the special needs kids? Your lives are not as valuable to many pro abortion people.

5) The next thing some pro choice people say is that they do not personally believe in abortion, but would afford other's the choice to end the lives of their unborn Babies. Gee, how nice of them. I always wonder how a person who personally believes that aborting his own Baby is wrong because it is ending a human life, can support allowing other babies to die. HYPOCRITE PHONEY!

6) After all the scare tactics and deceptions, their next step is to lie and say they do not support late term abortions for any reason. But when you show them that the Democrat party has become so radical to even support allowing a late term Baby born alive from a botched abortion to die, they are finally silent because even they can not come up with an excuse for such inhumanity and the fact that they elect these people.

I am not here trying to judge any woman who has had an abortion. I am speaking for the millons of future lives that the Left has sacrificed, all under the notion they are burdens to society. I've heard many people (racists) who bring up the great many Black Babies that would be born were it not for abortions. WOW! I think the support of abortions quite often has racist over tones.

There can be no excuse for taking an innocent life other than rare extreme cases. Our culture is dieing from such little respect for innocent human life. There are absolutely millions of parents waiting to adopt these unwanted babies.

Side: Yes
1 point

The GOP has allowed these exceptions since abortion was legalized yet we still hear every day from the talking heads in the Democrat party about these extreme rare cases.

Except that is completely inconsistent with the rest of your arguments. Why would rape abortions be ok if a fetus (or baby before birth, that is) is on the exact same moral footing of any other human? Rape victims still aren't allowed to murder anyone.

(by the way, rape pregnancies can be prevented from day after pills that prevent conception)

That doesn't stop conception. It stops the zygote from implanting in the uterine wall. If life begins at conception, like you believe (something I find to be incredible arbitrary) then those pills are the same thing as abortions.

And I imagine because you care so deeply about this, you have contacted your representative to inform them that you want to make sure that this medication is readily available to women in case this is necessary?

2) The next thing they do is talk about the medical name of an unborn Baby..... Fetus. By using the name Fetus, they somehow believe it changes the status of the life growing inside the mother.

When does a sperm and egg turn into a baby? How is that any less arbitrary than the moment of birth?

Side: No
FromWithin(4977) Disputed
3 points

I have clarified my position many times in regards to what you are asking.

Yes, I do not agree with rape abortions because that baby deserves life no matter who it's father. There is always adotion if the baby reminds the mother of the rape.

I am going by what doctors say about the medication that can be used to prevent "CONCEPTION" soon after a rape. If they are wrong about this, then I am against it.

I support life of mother abortions because it saves a life and the mother and doctor would have to make that terrible decision.

The reason I speak to all these extreme case abortions is because the GOP DOES allow those exceptions on their compromise bills. When you listen to Democrats, they constantly use fear tactics to infer that these extreme case abortions would be outlawed.

I don't agree with all extreme case abortions, but if I can prevent the vast vast vast vast majortiy of abortions done purely for elective birth control, then I will vote for the GOP and take the lessor of two evils.

Side: Yes
Jace(4448) Disputed
0 points

Of course legalized abortion advocates use tactics. So do illegalized abortion advocates. That's just how the game is played. At any rate, I diverge from your representation...

1. I'm fine with all cases and am upfront about it.

2. Call it whatever you like. I'm not overly concerned with the semantics myself. The unborn lack self-concept, and that is my litmus for personhood.

3. Not relevant to my position, so I don't bring it up.

4. Not an argument I deploy, and I'm inclined to agree with your general point here (although it's not really comparable to the German Holocaust).

5. Leaning loosely libertarian myself I don't think this sort of reasoning is problematic, but as with the rest it's not an argument I use.

6. I'm fine with late term abortions.

How do you think our culture is dying as a result of legalized abortions? Abortion has been practiced as long as culture as been around, so it's not immediately evident to me what material threat this poses.

Side: No
FromWithin(4977) Disputed
2 points

So you are telling me that the baby a few minutes after birth has self-concept? Get real, it is no different from before traveling down the birth canal except for the fact the Doctor has not yet spanked it. That's your determination of life?

It's sad we have people who are so selfish to sacrifice even our most innocent viable late term babies for sake of convienence.

Side: Yes
2 points

there have actually been cases when the child was killed after being birthed. so please explain the difference in killing new born child and killing a child in the womb? either way your killing a human making it murder either way.

Side: Yes
Jace(4448) Disputed
1 point

No difference. Neither has self-concept and therefore neither is murder.

Side: No
1 point

double post...........

Side: No
2 points

murยทder

หˆnoun

the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

Please show me where it says "if your a fetus in the womb its not illegal but if your already out of the vagina its a terrible tragedy!"

that is not stated because its not true you could kill someone in holy water and it would still be murder.

Side: Yes

Any doctor will tell you that a fetus is alive. I guess liberals don't care about them because they can't vote yet.

Side: Yes
Ravenspirit(16) Disputed
1 point

A fetus may be alive, but so is a baby chicken. You know what we do with male baby chickens? We grind them up and put them in chicken nuggets. You don't care that every day, thousands of innocent animals die. Why are human lives so different to you? Whether or not you agree with making abortion illegal, a woman should reserve the right to decide what to do with her own body.

Side: No
1 point

It's already illegal. It fits the legal definition of murder. Any doctor will tell you that a fetus is alive. It's a medical fact. By aborting it, you are ending a life.

Side: Yes
Jace(4448) Disputed
1 point

Being alive does not automatically confer rights on to the living thing. Pigs are alive. Corn is alive. Bacteria are alive. They don't have a protected right to life.

Ending life, even a human life, is permissible under other circumstances even under the legal definition of murder. Self-defense, non-negligent accidental killing, etc. are exempt so there is no rational or legal reason that abortion could not also be an exception under law (and, indeed, it is in many places that otherwise outlaw murder).

Side: No
Amarel(1696) Disputed
2 points

The concepts in question are not whether a fetus is alive, but whether it is a human life, whether those taking it know they are taking a human life, and whether they are justified in knowingly taking a human life.

Most arguments stop at the first concept as people do not generally agree on what constitutes a human life (to the extent that rights are warranted). If everyone agreed that the fetus is a human life, then doctors would know that a human life is what they are taking. Whether an exception is made for this kind of taking of life depends on what we consider justification for such taking. Most abortions are not a matter of self defense, negligence, or non negligent manslaughter. While some abortions would meet current criteria for justification in taking human life, most would not.

But again, we can't even get over the first hurdle.

Side: Yes
Grugore(188) Disputed
1 point

Regardless of how you classify the unborn, if left unmolested and barring a miscarriage, they would grow up to become a person. You are doing worse than simply killing them. You are robbing them of a life that they will never have. All of the experiences, the joys of life that they will never know. Anyone who supports abortion is a monster of the worst kind, and you will answer to God for every life you have taken. There is a special place in Hell reserved for you. And whether you believe it or not, it will happen. Count on it.

Side: Yes

Abortion can be proved illegal it is a self-incrimination to a crime. It is not illegal due to the fact it is a confession and as such can still be proved to be illegal. Why abortion can be justified as a crime is the fact the self-incrimination has not limit or no legal representation in the public. The incrimination is not controlled by the woman making the original confession.

First: Gender Specific Amputation can be a confession it simple does not have the self-incrimination in place.

Second: Abort means to stop as a pause. The process aborted often can be restarted. If and when the process is to be stopped indefinitely the title is changed to a termination. Here again is the Constitutional exposure to the self-incrimination being made. We all know the official stop being made is in fact a termination. Again Female Specific Amputation describes a removal of something only a woman might have medically removed. No self-incrimination no direct incrimination of the public to a possible crime.

Side: Yes
1 point

Why is it legal to kill a child one minute before it is born but illegal one minute after

Side: Yes
1 point

I think it is funny how little we need in a definition of life if we found life on Mars, compared to the definition of life we need to kill an unborn baby here on Earth.....

Side: Yes
0 points

Abortion regardless of the timing, is murder.

The "what if a women was raped" has become a banality for you pro-choicers, and it does not justify killing the baby. If a woman claims to be suffering mentally, she can put the child up for abortion or hand it over to the government.

If a woman willingly had sex, and did not choose to wear a ring, it is her mistake, there is no justification for aborting an unborn child.

Side: Yes
4 points

No, clinics providing safe pregnancy terminations along with counselling provision should be readily available.

The only person qualified to make the decision to terminate a pregnancy is the expectant mother-to-be.

It's her right to decide what does and what does not happen to her body.

Side: No
2 points

No it should not be illegal the choice should always be there in all societies

Side: No
Jace(4448) Clarified
1 point

Why?

Side: Yes
Dermot(2714) Clarified
3 points

Because to do otherwise is denying a woman the right to autonomy over her own body

Side: Yes
2 points

NO! Trump should be illegal, HE should be terminated .... legally, of course! (Like he terminated Comey!)

Side: No
Antrim(963) Disputed
1 point

He didn't terminate Comey.

He terminated Comey's position as head of the F.B.I.

The electorate will have the opportunity to terminate President Trump's term of office in around 4 years time, if they wish to do so in sufficient numbers.

Side: Yes
2 points

Abortion should not be illegal for one reason; women have the right to choose what happens to their own bodies. Whatever your beliefs, you have to agree with that. The people who support abortion shouldn't have their choices taken away because of the other half of the population; if abortion was legal, the anti-abortion side of the population could simply choose not to have an abortion. Also, there are too many homeless, loveless children in this world. Unwanted pregnancies could result in abortions, which can actually be a mercy for the child, though the child isn't really a human at this point. People who want abortions usually end up giving their unwanted child to child services, or an orphanage, and the child suffers because of this. Personally, I would rather die than be forever unwanted, going from house to house with people who just want the money. Mainly, a woman has the right to choose what to do with her own body, and no man, government, or person with different beliefs should be able to take that away. Lastly, when an abortion is performed, the growing child isn't fully formed and, as such, shouldn't be considered a "human," per say. Even if you don't agree with this, you have to at least agree that you have the right to do whatever you want with your own body, and no one should be able to take that away.

Side: No
2 points

Every person has the right to their body, whatever it contains or produces is the property of the person. Therefore, because of property rights, that person should have the right to exterminate or decide what happens to their body. Even if the child is five years, that child has the right to his or her body and what they want to do with it.

If we have the right to free speech, how can we not have the right to our bodies? To control what we want have done to it? If we don't allow that simple human right, we are no longer free and our right is being severely inhibited.

This does not serve in the best welfare of the population, as once we start to hinder our right to what we do with our bodies, it can hinder other progress made, such as our right to marry who we want, our right to refusing medical services... etc.

Abortion also serves in the best interest of the population, as there is a current overpopulation of people. Therefore, if more people have access and right to these service, we may see a stalling in overpopulation, which is of major concern to the planet.

Therefore, it is for these above reasons which I believe that abortion should be legal.

Side: No
1 point

You should have every right to abort a baby as this is the life of ones own and you have no right to control the way one lives it. You do not know about what has happened in their life- are they under sixteen and pregnant while still being at school with an unwanted baby or have they even been a victim of sexual assault or rape and as a result are pregnant with the child of their rapist. Yes perhaps so and doing an act like this is inconsiderate and punishing someone further for something that is not their fault. If you disagree with me, it is quite concerning and your opinion will need changing by perhaps some research or listening to stories where rates as these are high.

Side: No
Jace(4448) Disputed
1 point

Why does it matter what their reasons are? You are ceding ground that does not have to be given. If they have every right then they have every right. Period. If you really believe that then why bring up the secondary (weaker, conditional) justification?

Side: No
1 point

The human organism does not become a person until it has the capacity for self-concept, so it is not murder to kill the unborn. Nor do I see any compelling reason to value the life of a non-person over the liberties of a person as a general rule. Moreover, there are no serious social repercussions insofar as allowing the killing of the unborn does not condone the killing of the born (especially the self-conceived born).

Side: No
Amarel(1696) Clarified
1 point

The capacity for self-concept isn't acquired until quite a while after birth. Is this your understanding?

Side: Yes
Jace(4448) Clarified
1 point

Yes, it is. I extend the permissibility of killing accordingly.

Side: Yes
1 point

There should always be the ability to choose. If a pregnant woman does not want that child for whatever reason, she should not be forced to keep it. There doesn't need to be a good reason for a pregnant women to abort a fetus, it could be medical, it could be because they were raped or it could be because they just don't want the child, it really doesn't matter. I see and hear about too many kids who haven't had good parenting because their parents didn't want them but they couldn't get an abortion. No one should be forced into having a child they don't want or aren't ready for.

Side: No
1 point

Usually people don't want a child because they can't support it. If this is the case then I would rather not have my child go through the suffering of living in poverty or going to a care home with foster parents. There are so many cases of foster parents abusing their children.

Side: No
NowASaint(1161) Clarified
1 point

So you think God is wrong when in the Old Testament he commanded the complete wiping out of evil cultures, yet you think it's good for you to kill your own children? I guess you are that evil culture condemned to die, so you think nothing of killing your own children.

Side: Yes
Undecided(6) Disputed
1 point

In the United States we have safe Haven laws, where people who have children and can't support them can drop them off at places like hospitals, police departments and fire stations with no questions asked. They do not owe any money for doing this

Side: Yes
1 point

I say No, but to an extent. If a child could be removed from the mother and survive, be it on machines or not, then Yes that should be illegal. But say the mother was raped and in a month or two, she discovers she is pregnant from said rapist, the baby is no where near fully developed, then No it shouldn't be illegal for her to get an abortion.

Side: No
1 point

Abortion should not be illegal because every person should have choices and that is especially true of people who have to deal with the choice of wanting a baby or not. If abortion clinics were banned you would take away that choice from them, and they might still attempt to get rid of the baby in a very dangerous way that could potentially kill or hurt them. Another thing is if abortion was illegal there is the matter, Who's going to help this person with healthcare? Hospitals expect you to hand over the cash even if you don't have it, and this is especially hard for people in the lower class. So, the baby is not protected and neither is the person who had the baby and never wanted it. So 2 actual lives would be at stake. Abortion should be legal because it is not anyone's choice to tell them to keep the baby or not.

Side: No

No a self-incriminated confession to a crime cannot be/have proclamation as legal, this type of action places the burden of cost to the crime on the panel who makes the proclamation. It is a convert way to fund civil War as a self-incrimination is shared by the admittance to taking part in, With abortion this means taking part in a self-incriminating confession of murder.

A panel should have some informal constitutional separation from self-incrimination. This state is create by a wording such as Gender specific Amputation, or Female specific Amputation.

The issue of abortion is a religious test to hold political office. This understanding comes from the intellectual nature of the crimes as it is created by the use of a self-incriminating confession. As each confession requires its own impartial trial and not panel decision. Unless panel was advised or had knowledge of the protection given by separation of church and state,How it is used to make Constitutional separation from self-incriminating confession. Confessions of self admittance are not insured as legal. It was the diversion of tax funding away from constitutional separation of church and state that directs this crime as religious test to hold political office.As now there is a bribe made with payments to the public incriminating voters in a self-incrimination to a confession to murder and perjury.

Abort means to stop. Something aborted and not meant to be restarted is terminated. Meaning ended. This all adds up to self-incrimination.

Side: No
1 point

I don't think Abortion is Murder. This is based what a fetus is, what makes a person a person; and what qualities a human requires in order for killing them to be illegal.

Saying that; the "debate" is relatively meaningless as those who have taken one side or the other aren't going to change.

What both sides can likely agree with is this:

- Fewer abortions are better than more abortions.

- Working towards the situation where no one needs or wants to chose abortion is preferable than having an ideological ping pong of it being made legal, then illegal, then legal again.

Realistically, the way to reduce abortions by the greatest amount, is to keep them legal and actually undermine the big financial, economic and social implications of unwanted pregnancy.

Childcare support, Maternity leave, regulations on work flexibility, and the ability to put a career on hold but go right back; detailed sex education and access to a wide range of contraception are going to "save more lives" from a practical reality standpoint than simply saying "We will force you to have that baby, and then not give a damn about the effects of poverty, social isolation, long term economic isolation have on either you or your baby which can well have a significant negative impact on you and your babies eventually happiness and wellbeing."

Side: No
1 point

Till the time a child is inside the womb, it is directly dependent on the mother. If for personal reasons the mother decides not to host the baby anymore then that decision should be respected. She is responsible (along with the father) for bringing the child into the world and if they want to decide against that, then there is nothing wrong.

Maybe it was an accidental pregnancy.

Maybe there was a split between the parents.

Maybe they landed in a situation where their financial situation didn't allow for a child.

In any case the child won't get the care it deserves and may not grow up to be a responsible human being.

Also, considering the population growth, isn't it great that someone doesn't want to add more to the burden of the earth?

Side: No
wonderwizard(2) Disputed
1 point

This reasoning is totally absurd and shows how much our country cares for a newborn life. Yes the baby's body resides in the mother's body but how does respecting one person's body justify the destroying of another's? If it was accidental or a split decision or a financial burden there's this thing called ADOPTION!!!! You don't need to destroy the baby because you feel it's an inconvienience. Really? Since when do we murder somebody JUST TO MAKE OURSELVES FEEL BETTER! It's so sad this is even an issue. Mother Theresa once said "Give the child to me. Don't kill the child. I will take any child whose mother would abort it". If only we all had that sentiment......

Side: Yes