Instigator / Pro
9
1485
rating
91
debates
46.15%
won
Topic
#1109

Resolved: Abortion should remain legal in the US

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
6
Better sources
4
4
Better legibility
2
2
Better conduct
0
2

After 2 votes and with 5 points ahead, the winner is...

semperfortis
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Two weeks
Max argument characters
15,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
14
1684
rating
15
debates
100.0%
won
Description

Intro

Many thanks to semperfortis for agreeing to this debate. Since his opponent forfeited the other debate, I thought I could give him a nice challenge to his arguments.

Definitions

Abortion - the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy.

Should: used to indicate obligation, duty, or correctness, typically when criticizing someone's actions.

Legal: permitted by law.

Rules

1. No forfeits
2. Citations must be provided in the text of the debate
3. No new arguments in the final speeches
4. Observe good sportsmanship and maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere
5. No trolling
6. No "kritiks" of the topic (challenging assumptions in the resolution)
7. For all resolutional terms, individuals should use commonplace understandings that fit within the logical context of the resolution, the reality of the US political landscape, and this debate
8. The BOP is evenly shared
9. Pro must post their arguments in R1 and waive in R4
10. Rebuttals of new points raised in an adversary's immediately preceding speech may be permissible at the judges' discretion even in the final round (debaters may debate their appropriateness)
11. Violation of any of these rules, or of any of the R1 set-up, merits a loss

Structure

1. Opening
2. Rebuttal
3. Defense
4. Closing

-->
@Dr.Franklin

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Dr.Franklin // Mod action: [not Removed]
>Points Awarded: 1 points to con for conduct.

>Reason for Decision: "1/2 forfiet, neither side convinced me”

Reason for Mod Action>vote is sufficient

*******************************************************************

-->
@Trent0405

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Trent0405 // Mod action: [Removed]
>Points Awarded: 7 points to con.

>Reason for Decision: "Description states how you can't forfeit, meaning PRO conceded.

Reason for Mod Action> Source and S&G points are not explained and thus this vote is not sufficient.

While the rules of a debate maybe used to produce conduct; and the rules here explicitly state that conduct can be considered meriting a loss meaning arguments could be awarded- this does not equate to the debate being unmoderated.

*******************************************************************

-->
@Alec

It is to compensate for veing weak debaters. The more they can control their environment and see the exact same thing over and over, the easier it is to grab wins. I saw BSH1 beg an opponent to allow the debate to end in a tie once because he argued something he didn't like. When he refused, the next debate bsh1 made a rule to make people assume "normative ethics". It is just pussy like behavior.

-->
@David

What if you break on of your own rules accidentally? Then you would be a hypocrite, plus you would lose the debate.

-->
@Alec

Then that's their problem, not mine.

-->
@David

It's like reading the terms of service to things. Most people don't read them thoroughly enough and as a result, it would not be the best way to grab a win.

-->
@Alec

To post what we would expect of the other player.

-->
@David

Why do your debates and Bsh1 debates have so many rules?

-->
@David

Ireland didn't outlaw it. They previously just had it restricted with the life of the other as the exception.

-->
@Alec

European countries are very diverse. In some countries it is easier, while some countries (Ireland) it is much harder. Ireland completely outlawed abortion until recently.

-->
@Alec

Argumentum ad populum is "The fallacy of attempting to induce acceptance of an unexamined or unproved conclusion by arousing the feelings, prejudices, or interests of a political party, mob, or any large group of people."

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon

It's like saying "Europe has free health care, why shouldn't we?" It's a fallacious argument.

-->
@David

What does that mean?

Evidence Incase Omar asks for it: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/278350/

-->
@Alec

Argumentum ad populum

-->
@David
@semperfortis

If Europe heavily restricts abortions beyond 12 weeks, why should America be more lenient?