Instigator / Pro
1
1500
rating
1
debates
50.0%
won
Topic
#5550
Abortion should be legal
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Winner
1
1
After 2 votes and with the same amount of points on both sides...
It's a tie!
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- One day
- Max argument characters
- 1,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
1
1515
rating
15
debates
86.67%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
Pro
#1
The main discussion about the morality of abortion lies in how unacceptable murder may seem, the fetus is a living being.
Murder is not inherently immoral; Our survival, for example, largely depends on the mass destruction of viruses and bacteria through the use of antivirals and antibiotics.
the argument changes to human life.
However, the human being is, in physical terms, similar to other creatures.
If we leave aside arbitrary differences, the only thing that can distinguish humans in their moral importance from other beings is consciousness, a quality in which the fetus is very similar to animals.
It becomes reasonable to argue that in cases where it is valid to kill a non-human entity (for example, to defend physical well-being) abortion is also valid.
Furthermore, evidence shows that banning abortion does not reduce abortion; It is better to use money to prevent unwanted pregnancies than to lock up women.
Institute Guttmacher. (2018). "Abortion Worldwide 2017"
Con
#2
Thank you thepretty,
I will provide a rebuttal:
Murder is not inherently immoral
Even though the fetus isn't a human being, it will eventually become one. Through abortion, you deprive this human being of his life. It is extremely immoral to do since everyone has a right to live and enjoy living
Furthermore, evidence shows that banning abortion does not reduce abortion; It is better to use money to prevent unwanted pregnancies than to lock up women
You are basically saying that even though it is wrong, we should allow it in order to reduce crime. That's not the way the world works. This is like creating a law that makes an action that is wrong illegal and then destroying it just because it leads to crime when in fact the action itself is wrong and should be considered a crime and now crimes are being committed without being penalised. I explained it in a quite complicated way but i will explain in the following arguments why adoption is wrong
Sources for each round will be found in comments (this round doesn't have any) since the character limit is very small
Round 2
Pro
#3
"Although the fetus is not a human being, it eventually will be. Through abortion, this human being is deprived of its life. It is extremely immoral to do so since every person has the right to live and enjoy life."
Great, you have accepted my point about the nature of the fetus, consciousness is a quality that it may acquire (or not, due to many physiological factors) in the future, but it is a quality that it has not yet possessed, consequently it cannot serve as a “causal” morality since it is something that is not present at this moment, however the mother is aware, her well-being takes precedence just as it would against bacteria.
If they truly believe that human life is intrinsically valuable, then the best we can hope for as a society is to reduce deaths. Criminalizing abortion does not reduce abortion, but it does increase women's deaths.
The Lancet: global, regional and subregional classification of safe abortions, 2010-2014.
Con
#4
Great, you have accepted my point about the nature of the fetus
Great, you chose to drop my point.
Abortion being legal or not shouldn't be decided by the fact that the fetus is not a fully-developed being. What's important is understanding that fetus will become person and by killing fetus, you kill the person (murder).
If they truly believe that human life is intrinsically valuable, then the best we can hope for as a society is to reduce deaths
That's a different problem and irrelevant, since you won't solve it by making abortion legal
I proceed with arguments
1) Legal abortion promotes a throwaway culture . I firmly believe that we shouldn't dispose of lives.
If a child isn't wanted by a parent, another one will want it and there's a reason for which adopting centres exist. Every time a child is aborted, an infertile for example couple loses the chance of finding a child.
Instead of committing murder, we should teach kids to be responsible when it comes to sex
According to Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, NJ: “abortion represents a failure to recognize human life and promotes a culture in which human life in its most vulnerable moment is perceived as disposable"
Round 3
Pro
#5
I counterargued your reasoning, you cannot kill a person who does not exist, if you accept that the fetus is not yet human (and you did) there is no human to kill, the causes are before the event, not after. The future development of the fetus cannot be the cause of the immorality of abortion.
Legalizing abortion effectively reduces the practice of clandestine abortions (at least according to the evidence), which reduces women's deaths.
You are ignoring the facts, thousands of children grow up without parents, they are never adopted, contrary to what you say, abortion promotes the idea that we should minimize suffering, an already conscious vulnerable being (disabled for example) will suffer if we try. kill him, A different case to abortion, I repeat, prohibiting abortion does not reduce abortion.
Criminalizing abortion leads to the martyrdom of victims of sexual abuse, which is deplorable.
Con
#6
the fetus is not yet human
Even though i said so due to lack of knowledge, scientists say that life begins at conception, making abortion murder (Conception is the moment a sperm cell fertilizes an egg cell). Also, ethical definitions of what constitutes a human disagree with this statement
abortion reduces clandestine abortions
Statement is outweighed by immorality of abortion
abortion minimizes suffering
It's not, because the mother will live with guilt that she killed a baby while the solution is to improve social services (catching rapists) and adoption systems, not terminate pregnancies and deprive babies of life
Criminalizing Abortion Leads to Martyrdom
We should protect both mother and baby since the fetus is separate and needs protection. One doesn't come at the cost of the other. Society can cure mother's trauma while a baby can live
2)There are alternatives, for example increased access to birth control, health insurance to pay for contraceptives, while studies also show that sex ed plays a role.
Teens who studied it have sex later in their life compared to those who haven't, minimising possibility of abortion as responsibility is taught.
Round 4
Pro
#7
What gives moral value to a creature is conscience, if an entity cannot feel pain then hurting it is less despicable than hurting another type of creature, I have made it clear that, within a certain ethical perspective, the fetus is worth less than the mother.
Regardless of whether abortion is inherently immoral (something I believe I have refuted), the ban does nothing to reduce its incidence.
mothers who suffer guilt do not decrease (given that abortion maintains similar rates), mothers who suffer physical damage from clandestine abortions do, in addition, sexual abuse is very difficult to prove, and that is not something that is going to be resolve in the short term. .
If we ban abortion, many women who have suffered sexual abuse will inevitably be imprisoned, all in favor of a policy that does not solve the problem.
What you mention brings me back to my previous argument, it is better to use that money on the public policies you mention instead of locking up women.
Con
#8
if an entity cannot feel pain then hurting it is less despicable
That's outrageous. It's like saying murder is justified if the murdered doesn't feel pain. Would you say that about a person? Well, a fetus is a person too since life begins at conception
the fetus is worth less than the mother
Both human beings so both worthy of care and protection
the ban does nothing to reduce its incidence
Although it doesn't erase the problem, it deters people from terminating pregnancies due to legal implications (women fear they will be caught having abortions so they stop doing it in order not to be locked up)
sexual abuse is very difficult to prove
We should work on that instead of allowing a different crime (murder) as reimbursement
many women who have suffered sexual abuse will inevitably be imprisoned
They have the choice to either perform a clandestine abortion and face both legal and physical risks or have the baby and give it to an adoption centre for a parent who wants it. The second choice seems much more preferable
it is better to use that money on the public policies
Yes but these policies need to be strengthened in order to minimise the need for abortions, not multiply them
Round 5
Pro
#9
You continue to assume that human life is intrinsically more valuable than that of other beings, but I see no arguments in favor of that, the human being is essentially similar to other creatures, the main difference is consciousness, in fact a creature that does not feel the Pain is morally worth less than the person who suffers it.
Second, the evidence shows that the causes of abortion (poverty, social discrimination, etc.) weigh heavily enough on mothers that prison is not a useful deterrent.
In short, you defend a policy that is not effective and that generates physical and psychological trauma related to pregnancy for women who were sexually abused.
The evidence shows that legalizing abortion does not increase it (at least not considerably), but it does allow that money to be distributed towards more effective policies that involve less human suffering.
Guttmacher Institute. (2018). "Abortion in the world 2017"
Con
#10
the human being is essentially similar to other creatures
It's not since it possesses qualities like moral reasoning, compassion etc. that differentiate it from animals. Animals fend for themselves while humans have the ability to live in harmonious ways
prison is not a useful deterrent
It's a deterrent that's JUST. Prison will be there if a mother doesn't take advice and starts having multiple abortions, spiraling out of control. Prison will put her back in control, reminding her that abortion is murder and will be punished.
generates physical and psychological trauma
Therapists will help mothers deal with trauma, erasing need for abortion (murder), free of charge. As i said, it's the policies that deal with rape that should change, legalising abortions is not the way.
it does allow that money to be distributed towards more effective policies
Abortion funding detracts from other services like maternal healthcare and adoption support
legalizing abortion does not increase it
It does, since the throwaway culture is promoted. Children will start to think that it's fine to have abortions and then abortions (murders) multiply
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:
While I disagree with the assertion that terminating a fetus constitutes 'MURDER'—since murder is a legal definition distinct from morality—I do concur that it involves taking a life. Additionally, although I understand the argument regarding the absence of pain, I align with the counterargument that the inability to experience pain does not morally justify the act of termination. The argument would be stronger if it addressed the potential suffering in the world that the fetus would be spared from by not being born.
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:
A deep topic hampered by a minuscule character limit. Pro asserts that a fetus is not yet a human, which Con agrees at first agrees with, though they argue that preventing it from being human is still as immoral as killing a human. However, Pro responds that the well-being of the mother should take precedent, and I buy this argument more. Con tries to backtrack and claim that life actually does begin at conception, but as this statement is not clearly sourced and contradicts their earlier arguments, I can't let it pass.
Pro's strongest point is their argument that criminalizing abortion does little to nothing to prevent it from happening, but legalizing it can prevent unnecessary deaths and decrease suffering, a common argument in favor of legalizing abortion. Con argues that regardless, it's immoral so it should be banned, but I don't really buy this. I can buy that something may be immoral, but if criminalizing it leads to worse outcomes than not, it should be allowed to remain legal. Con tries to refute the idea that criminalizing abortion is ineffective, but their arguments mainly come from inferences about how criminalization is meant to work, whereas Pro actually used reliable sources to argue that it is ineffective. Reliable sources outweigh inferences, so Pro wins on that pont. Con tries to argue in the last round that funding for abortion services detracts from funding for other services like adoption and maternal healthcare, but this is unsourced, and even if it is true, I feel like the impacts from Pro's argument about reduced mortality and overall suffering are greater.
In the end, I feel like Pro's arguments won out and had the greater impacts.
It's your vote and you can do whatever you want, but my opponent offered no effective rebuttal.
By the way, welcome to DART! I hope you stay. A lot of people who join this website never end up finishing a single debate, so kudos to you for actually completing an entire debate, and doing so reasonably well!
source for argument 1
https://abortion.procon.org/