Instigator / Pro

Mall

1389

rating

413

debates

44.55%

won

Topic

#5696

The sound reasons for women that do not have a right to abortion.

Status

Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics

Winner

After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...

Best.Korea

Tags

Law

Abortion

valid

important

Parameters

Publication date: 08.31.2024 01:46AM
Last updated date: 03.20.2025 10:44PM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 5
Time for argument: One week
Max argument characters: 30,000
Voting period: Six months
Point system: Winner selection
Voting system: Open

Contender / Con

Best.Korea

1233

rating

403

debates

39.45%

won

Description

Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.

Questions on the topic, send a message.

Round 1

Mall

09.07.2024 11:48AM

Pro

The sound reasons for women that do not have a right to abortion.

1. Countries or regions that do not allow or permit abortion outside of certain circumstances.

2. Religions that do not allow or permit abortion .

3. Personal will that does not allow abortion.

These are the basic sound reasons for women not having a right to abortion.

Women of a particular country, religion or principle are women that do not have a right meaning not allowed for women that apply to those sound reasons. The sound reasons for women that do not have a right to abortion.

Question is, why in a particular country for instance but not all countries , the restrictions aren't present? Is one country more progressive or is the other actually sane while the other has regressed?

Bonus question(s):

If aborting a pregnancy would be deemed in violation of the rights to the unborn, isn't it sound to justify violating the mother's rights to avoid infringing on the rights of the unborn child?

Even if the government recognizes or allows abortion, does the woman really have an exclusive right being that the law had to recognize it first?

Just like marriage and driving a motor vehicle is not an exclusive right. Many people feel that once you lay with someone, move in with that one, say you're together, you're married.

No matter how much entitlement a woman thinks she has, at the end of it, it was somebody else that has decided "yes" or "no". About the only thing you have right to is your mind thinking anyway you will.

I yield.

Best.Korea

09.07.2024 12:53PM

Con

My opponent has 2 burdens:

1. He must present sound reasons for women that do not have right to abortion

2. He must prove that those reasons are sound.

Thus, my opponent must present sound reasons why some women dont have right to abortion, some examples needed.

The sound reasons for women that do not have a right to abortion.

1. Countries or regions that do not allow or permit abortion outside of certain circumstances.

2. Religions that do not allow or permit abortion .

3. Personal will that does not allow abortion.

Reasons by definition fall into category "if, then". So my opponent needs to present "if, then" logic here.

Lets see if his logic works.

"If a country doesnt allow abortion, then woman has no right to abortion."

This doesnt work, since human rights arent determined by government, but by logical debate where they are established.

Same applies to religion. As for personal will, that doesnt take away right to abortion, which still exists.

Question is, why in a particular country for instance but not all countries , the restrictions aren't present? Is one country more progressive or is the other actually sane while the other has regressed?

Countries that allow abortions do care more about liberty, quality of life, pain. My opponent must disprove them.

Bonus question(s):

If aborting a pregnancy would be deemed in violation of the rights to the unborn, isn't it sound to justify violating the mother's rights to avoid infringing on the rights of the unborn child?

Unborn is attached to woman, feeds on woman's body, causes woman pain, endangers her life, lowers life quality.

My opponent doesnt merely need to argue that abortion is immoral, but that right to abortion is immoral.

Example, if not having right to abortion causes even more harm, then having right to abortion is moral.

Even if the government recognizes or allows abortion, does the woman really have an exclusive right being that the law had to recognize it first?

Thats the position you must prove, not ask me to argue a point you didnt even make. Arguments, not questions.

Just like marriage and driving a motor vehicle is not an exclusive right. Many people feel that once you lay with someone, move in with that one, say you're together, you're married.

Neither marriage neither driving a motor vehicle are equal to abortion. So comparison fails by difference in different situations.

No matter how much entitlement a woman thinks she has, at the end of it, it was somebody else that has decided "yes" or "no". About the only thing you have right to is your mind thinking anyway you will.

If someone else decided that woman has right to abortion, then follows that woman has right to abortion.

Round 2

Mall

09.13.2024 02:53PM

Pro

"This doesnt work, since human rights arent determined by government, but by logical debate where they are established."

There is no difference. Political debates take place to resolve these issues as well as being the catalyst to grant rights to women.

In which it has been established in those countries for women that do not have the right which is sound.

"Same applies to religion. As for personal will, that doesnt take away right to abortion, which still exists."

Let's go over the definition of someone having a right to something in this topic. Having a right is simply what is allowed by law.

Like you have a right to an attorney. You're well within your legal grounds for a lawyer. Now when the lawyer fails you and you go to prison, you do not have a right to leave the prison. That right has been taken away unless you've been exonerated. I hope we're clear now.

"Countries that allow abortions do care more about liberty, quality of life, pain. My opponent must disprove them."

Disprove them on what?

"Unborn is attached to woman, feeds on woman's body, causes woman pain, endangers her life, lowers life quality.

My opponent doesnt merely need to argue that abortion is immoral, but that right to abortion is immoral.

Example, if not having right to abortion causes even more harm, then having right to abortion is moral."

I'll ask the question this way. If it is deemed that the unborn has rights, isn't it justified to violate the rights of the woman to avoid violating the unborn's rights first?

Now if you don't answer yes or no to that, the opposing side is forfeiting to answer to avoid a display of bias .

"Thats the position you must prove, not ask me to argue a point you didnt even make. Arguments, not questions."

The opposing side forfeits another answer. The government gives you the right and the government can take it away which proves who has control and what you truly don't own. You don't have an innate right that somebody can give or take away .

That's why one country has given the right , another has not. Leaving an existence of women that do not have the right to abortion(notwithstanding exceptions).

Just on that one point alone, makes the topic statement true.

Case might as well be closed right here.

"Neither marriage neither driving a motor vehicle are equal to abortion. So comparison fails by difference in different situations."

I said nothing about equality. The comparison is a person having a right to each. Did you get it now or did you miss the point again?

"If someone else decided that woman has right to abortion, then follows that woman has right to abortion."

Sure, just not a human right nor will she have it in any of the reasons I listed off .

You can give your closing statements next round. Your done .

Best.Korea

09.13.2024 10:22PM

Con

You can give your closing statements next round. Your done .

Okay.

You were supposed to prove that there are sound reasons for women not having right to abortion.

I hoped you could present those sound reasons, but so far I didnt see it.

"Government decides" isnt a sound reason. Its not even a reason. Its not anything.

Round 3

Mall

09.17.2024 09:26AM

Pro

Ok readers, the opposing side is finished.

I'll reiterate for the record:

"The sound reasons for women that do not have a right to abortion.

1. Countries or regions that do not allow or permit abortion outside of certain circumstances.

2. Religions that do not allow or permit abortion .

3. Personal will that does not allow abortion.

These are the basic sound reasons for women not having a right to abortion.

Let the record show that the opposing side has not issued one single rebuttal for these reasons.

A woman of said country that does not appoint her the right to abortion is a sound reason of not having the right.

The opposing side has no objection to this as it is sound to adhere to the laws of the land as a law abiding citizen.

A woman of a religion that does not appoint her the right to abortion is a sound reason of not having the right.

The opposing side has no objection to this as it is sound to adhere to the rules of your religion.

A woman of a her own will that does not appoint her the right to abortion is a sound reason of not having the right.

The opposing side has no objection to this as it is sound to adhere to your will because the opposing side definitely agrees with a woman adhering to her will as a pro choice woman that elects to get an abortion.

There's no need in pretending there's a rebuttal to any of this.

Those are the closing statements. The opposing side need not to respond.

Case at rest.

Best.Korea

09.17.2024 10:30AM

Con

1. Countries or regions that do not allow or permit abortion outside of certain circumstances.
2. Religions that do not allow or permit abortion .
3. Personal will that does not allow abortion.

That is more like circular reasoning than a reason.

This isnt about who gets to decide if abortion should be permitted. Rights arent determined by any of the 3 you mentioned.

Round 4

Mall

09.20.2024 06:18PM

Pro

I rest my case.

Best.Korea

09.20.2024 07:44PM

Con

There is no case to rest.

Round 5

Mall

09.21.2024 07:52PM

Pro

Right because it's case closed .

Best.Korea

09.21.2024 08:47PM

Con

#10

There is no case to close.

Mall

03.20.2025 10:44PM

Please actually read what I say and understand it people. For instance, A sound reason a woman has no right to abortion could be based on her religion. Another based on her personal convictions. These are sound reasons aren't they? These avenues give her no right . She takes away her own right leaving her no right by her volition.

Do we understand this?

AnonYmous_Icon

09.20.2024 11:50PM

" Women don't have right of abortion , as the unborn child in her body actually not only her but also child of man.
0.5 (from women) + 0.5 (from man) = 1 new kid

unborn child is not the property of women , who take decision about it "

Rational Gladiators that's just my theory and it applicable only in some situation and in some my theory is wronge.

Swisse

09.13.2024 06:33PM

Ugh, I wanted to take this debate, if anyone wants to do, I'd like to (I would have to be pro-choice tho).

Barney

02.03.2025 07:42AM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Winner

1 point(s)

Reason:

Between pointing out the BoP is for sound (a much higher standard than logical validity), and catching that "human rights arent determined by government" con easily took this.

Pro for his part threw some popular phrases and questions against the wall to see what would stick, but as con pointed out, asking some questions does not equal proving soundness.