EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum
Views:
106

Abortion should be criminalized with no exeptions

(PRO)
0 points
(CON)
WINNER!
0 points
Natasha17Natasha17 (PRO)
Abortion involves the killing of a fetus. One bad thing about killing a fetus is that the fetus is deprived of a future of value. Think of all the things which make your life good and worth living: understanding the world, seeing your children grow into independent, intelligent, and happy people, watching a sunset over the hills, enjoying good times with friends. By killing the fetus, we are depriving it of a future life likely to contain these things. And more. The fetus would likely grow to be a person who would have contributed to the world in many ways—bringing joy to its parents, happiness, and friendship to many. That person would have laboured for society and perhaps even discovered a cure for cancer or developed the first bionic eye.

Killing another person because you are not wanting that baby or are unable to give it up to another family to make sure that child has a better life is wrong.

Return To Top | Posted:
2019-03-13 09:30:05
| Speak Round
AcerAcer (CON)
I believe that today's debate should not hinge off of a purely pragmatic argument, but the individual scopes of philosophy we choose to view this topic over.  My view for today's round functions on a single principle: autonomy.

Autonomy is the thing that separates animals from humans, as it is the reason human lives contain infinite value, and not just the market cost for the meat that we're made of.  With that being said, autonomy is to some degree quantifiable, and it would be an objective statement to say that a mother has more autonomy than her unborn child; therefore, the mother has a greater inherit value.

In today's case, I will be valuing the autonomy of the mother greater than the child, simply because the mother has greater ability for rational thought and action; however, the autonomy of the fetus/embryo/child should also be valued, simply because of the internet capability for autonomy once that child is born.  It is simply valued less, and unless that the mother's autonomy has been or will be violated by the child, the child still has capability of human autonomy and should therefore be valued. 

The reason that I have gone pro in today's debate is not because I think that the status quo is acceptable. In fact, my opinion is quite the opposite.   I believe that abortion laws should be made much stricter, so that they value autonomy much more than they do the whims of the woman.  With my stance out of the way, let's begin why I think that abortion should be permitted in very specific cases.

1) Abortion should be legalized when the woman's autonomy is violated
There are multiple cases where abortion should be legal, because the autonomy of the woman has or will be violated, that constitute the abortion of a child.

Sub-point A) Non-consensual sex
A common argument brought up by my side is the abortion of a child when the child was a product of non-consensual sex.  Since the mother's autonomy was violated in the conception of the child, that woman has a right to exercise her autonomy and have a humane abortion performed before the 3rd trimester of her pregnancy.

Sub-point B) Abortion should be legalized when the pregnancy poses a significant threat to the life of the mother
Another situation that threatens the mother's autonomy is when the child poses a active threat to the mothers life, not the mother's health, because the term heath is too ambiguous and too easily abused.  As previously mentioned, the mother has an objectively greater autonomy than the child, therefore, greater value.  However, an abortion for any other reason, such an argument for emotional or economic stability, is absolutely immoral and genuinely sickening.

Summary: Unless the abortion is for the benefit of the mother's autonomy, an abortion is immoral.

My opponents final argument, "Killing another person because you are not wanting that baby or are unable to give it up to another family...is wrong."  I agree, and as a matter of fact, this argument flows to my side because of the terms on which I established when abortion was acceptable, and the opponent did not explicitly say that there isn't a scenario where abortion isn't acceptable, and provided no further examples.

It is for these reasons that I urge a pro ballot in today's debate.

Return To Top | Posted:
2019-03-13 11:05:09
| Speak Round
Cross-Examination
: In your own words, what is autonomy?
: Do you believe that autonomy has value?

Return To Top | Speak Round


View As PDF

Enjoyed this debate? Please share it!

You need to be logged in to be able to comment
AcerAcer
Seeing as though my opponent hasn't rebutted any of my arguments, they should all be flown through.
Posted 2019-03-19 10:06:37
The judging period on this debate is over

Previous Judgments

There are no judgements yet on this debate.

Rules of the debate

  • Text debate
  • Individual debate
  • 3 rounds
  • No length restrictions
  • No reply speeches
  • Uses cross-examination
  • Permissive Judging Standard (notes)
  • Forfeiting rounds means forfeiting the debate
  • Images allowed
  • HTML formatting allowed
  • Rated debate
  • Time to post: 3 days
  • Time to vote: 1 week
  • Time to prepare: None