Instigator / Pro
0
1500
rating
0
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#5612
Abortion should be illegal
Status
Voting
The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.
Voting will end in:
00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 450
- Voting period
- Two months
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
1
1465
rating
34
debates
55.88%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
At the moment of conception, a new human being is created. All human beings have rights. The supreme right is the right to life. This right is a prerequisite for all other rights, as no other right can be exercised without it.
Unborn children do not have a right to life. All rights are reserved for a person after birth, not before. The U.S. Constitution also does not grant people a right to live; it only outlines the conditions that must be followed before depriving a citizen of life. Abortion is also not a federal issue. It is now a state issue due to the recent ruling of Dobs V. Jackson. We, therefore, cannot make abortion illegal.
Round 2
Thebelief that any human, born or preborn, has differing rights than another human, implies that the lives of some are less valuable than the lives of others. There are manyclaims about what gives value to human life, such as, "the value of a human life arises after birth". However, the claims are all matters of opinion, and therefore, subjective. It is a necessityfor a just society to draw a line in the most objective place possible.
The difference in value between born and unborn children is not subjective, and abortion cannot be charged with murder under federal law. But you can be charged with murder if a born baby dies from your actions. Pro has not addressed legal points that establish Abortion cannot be made illegal as a universal law. Pro has also failed to substantiate their position. I, on the other hand, have provided ample sources to prove my point.
Round 3
Born or unborn, they both have the right to live. It's not a question of whether abortion can be charged under federal law as murder. It is a question of whether the law should change, and the answer is a resounding yes, because society has a responsibility to protect those that cannot protect themselves. The U.S. does not have a "universal law" though you may construe the Constitution, its amendments, or other federal laws to be "universal".
Given that the Pro has not specified the jurisdiction, it is assumed they are referring to federal law, as that would be the only way for something to be universally illegal under all circumstances. The Constitution does not explicitly address the issue of abortion. Pro can't prove that unborn babies have rights and thus cannot say society has to protect them. unborn children are not citizens and thus do not have a right to life or anything else.
Round 4
Forfeited
As my opponent forfeited this round, I will await their response or conclusion argument in the final round.
Round 5
Federal law is indeed what is being referred to, as was stated in round 3. It is not a question of whether the Constitution does explicitly address the issue of abortion, but rather, whether the Constitution (or it's amendments) should explicitly address the issue of abortion. The answer to that is yes, because human life is inherently valuable, and society has a duty to protect those that cannot protect themselves; especially the innocent.
My opponent seeks a federal abortion ban based on personal belief. However, constitutional rights require birth. Unborn children don’t qualify. States should also have a say in abortion laws Moreover, my opponent lacks a concrete strategy. Their entire argument essentially reduces to a personal desire to outlaw it, rather than an objective rationale grounded in legal principles. Abortion should not be made illegal. It should be a state decision.
I once had someone take that values argument way too far. Glad to see such an argument when it's still within the sensible region.
Debates have the tendency to go off in multiple directions at once. This tendency is extremely counterproductive to a proper debate. For this reason, the number of characters is low, which has a great effect on keeping the conversation focused. In addition to this, as Albert Einstein famously said, "If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough.”
In the future, please give people ample characters to work with. Four hundred and fifty words is too short.
@Barney Without exception. If there were one, it would've be mentioned.
All or just some
I suggest pre-defining exceptions (otherwise they invalidate your argument)
Plus when in pregnancy it should be illegal.
Seriously, everyone on this Earth is stupid except me and few others, so life for me is just torture.
I wish I was aborted.