Abortion should be Illegal
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Number of rounds
- Time for argument
- One day
- Max argument characters
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
This debate is whether abortion should be illegal or not. I believe it has to be illegal.
Thanks for accepting this debate,
Firstly, my main argument is that abortion is murder. If you are not convinced it is murder, let me explain: Once a sperm cell enters the egg and fertilizes, the zygote is formed, which replicates, creating the embryo that continues to develop into a fetus. Now, when someone gets an abortion, they get rid of the embryo or fetus, preventing further development of the human and stopping pregnancy. The problem here is that you stop a developing human from eventually living. Although it may not be a living human, it is in the process of becoming alive and human, where stopping it from developing and becoming a living human being is murder. For example, if someone kills their friend, they have stopped them from living, thus killing them. Same logic applies to both scenarios, you prevent/stop a human from being alive.
Now that we have established that abortion is the same as murder, we continue to why it should be illegal. It should be illegal because it is killing a human which murder/killing is itself illegal. Murder of humans is wrong, that's why we made it illegal.
There are many situations where one would desperately need an abortion, but who are you, to willingly choose the death of a human. When two consenting adults have intercourse, they should be ready to be having children, as that's what sex is meant for. When they have intercourse, the risks are there with or without contraception, and if they take that risk, they cannot just kill the baby because it's inconvenient. In cases of rape victims it is far worse, but the question here would be if killing is justified. Even for rape, you would technically be killing the baby because they are an inconvenience and you don't want it. In situations where the mothers life is at risk, that could be the only exception for abortion to be legal, as here is where there is no clear judgement that can be made to who lives or dies.
No problem, a challenging debate is always fun- i apologize for my delay replying.
First I would just like to point out the fact that a baby is not considered living until it is fully expelled from the uterus with a beating heart or voluntary breaths, pulsating umbilical cord and voluntary movement of their muscles. This means the having an abortion (the child is not outside of the woman) should not be considered "man slaughter" or in anyway first degree murder. Another thing that everyone should keep in mind is that people (in this case women) who have been raped are very likely to get PTSD- and the child could be very much a reminder about the time the action of impregnation had taken place in. That would lead to most likely adoption which is something no child should have to experience going through.
If you are comfortable with answering a simple question- I would like to ask you what you think it would be like to have a reminder that you were rapped inside of you.
To answer your last question and clarify the whole debate. I think abortion should be illegal because its murder. Yes, rape can give PTSD and remind the rape victims of what happened but killing an innocent human life is not justified either. If you somehow convince me that abortion is not murder in any way then I will be completely fine with abortions.
How is it murder?
As you said, a baby (inside a pregnant women) is not considered living until it is able to beat its heart on its own... I agree with that, as long as a baby does not have consciousness or is unable to beat its heart on its own, its not alive. The reason I still call it murder is because this developing fetus or embryo is in the process of becoming a living human. Like I said, if you stop that development, its essentially killing it by preventing it from fully developing into a living human.
Think of it like this: If I was in the hospital on life support and was brain dead, I would be considered clinically dead, as I don't have consciousnesses, which prevents me from being able to breath and get my heart beating without technology. This means I would be dead. But lets say some crazy miracle happened and my brain started developing itself again, but is taking a few days until it finishes and allows me to be alive again with actual consciousnesses and a beating heart. Pulling the life support plug on me before those few days, would stop the blood from pumping through my body and my brain would stop developing itself. Although I am still dead, pulling the plug and stopping my pulse would prevent me from waking up and living, thus still technically killing me. Literally a different way of saying "I killed someone" is "I stopped them from living". In this analogy the person who stopped my life support would of killed me because I was about to be a living human again, where as they prevented me from that, which means they killed me.
I hope I am being clear with my explanation, if you need me to clarify please ask. Like I said at the top, if you somehow convince me that abortion is not murder then I will be fine with abortions.
Unfortunately- I myself am not likely to change your opinion on weather or not you decide to believe abortion is good or not. I would sure love to try though.
" If I was in the hospital on life support and was brain dead, I would be considered clinically dead, as I don't have consciousnesses, which prevents me from being able to breath and get my heart beating without technology. This means I would be dead"
In this sentence you stated in your argument you show as though you would be in a position where you would be brain dead- essentially as you stated clinically dead, if someone where to pull your life support that would be considered murder- so if a woman had a miss carriage- did the baby comit suicide?
I'm asking this because if this fetus has no knowledge about the outside world what so ever and is not voluntarily breathing or has a working heart plus doesn't really have on opinion on anything --- as well as you agreed to isn't alive (" I agree with that, as long as a baby does not have consciousness or is unable to beat its heart on its own, its not alive.") So what is alive? This child is being developed- developed means "to bring out the capabilities or possibilities of; bring to a more advanced or effective state" in this case the fetus has a possibility of becoming alive or supposedly having a miss carriage.
Besides that point- I would sort of like to ask what exactly would you do if someone where to get a mischarge- while it is supposedly illegal.
Sure to say you were to put every single little person into jail for what- I don't know 3 months maybe a year-- while there are multiple, actual, cold blooded murders who need to be held too? That would cause space to start piling and piling up in these jails--- before you say 'just build more' think- the world barely has enough space to pile trash and adding prison cells to that. If the fetus is not even breathing or actually living why call it murder and send them to prison? To add onto my point of space in jails- approximately 100,000 women get abortions each year, as well as approximately 428,000 people who go to jail each year.
I think you miss understood my analogy about me being brain dead. My point was that if my brain was in the process of developing and I would soon become living again; If someone pulled the plug on me, then although I may not of been alive when they did that, they completely prevented me from having a good chance of survival and living. In that sense they killed me by preventing me to live again. Although it is not exactly a normal murder of someone who is already alive, its a type of murder by preventing the existence of a human who you know will come to existence. Preventing that process from being completed and for the developing human to stop developing is equivalent to murder; Again, as I would be alive if they did't pull the plug on me (In the case of abortion, the child would be alive if the mother or doctor did not abort them). The brain dead situation is meant to relate to abortion, as they follow the same logic. Pulling the plug on me where I am soon to become human is murder, as much as aborting a child who is soon to become human.
Miscarriage - Here is where I want to make clear of something. Miscarriage isn't the baby killing itself or the mother choosing for it to die. The fetus or embryo fails developing by itself, thus putting the mother at risk of severe damage or potentially death. When the baby stops developing then it is unable to actually become living anymore (a failed pregnancy), so taking it out/aborting it wont be preventing it from becoming human as it is no longer able to. I am not exactly sure if the baby can somehow survive the miscarriage but again if a life is at risk then its the judgement of the carrier since her life might depend on it. Miscarriage should't be illegal as its a failed pregnancy and the baby can no longer even develop into a human.
If your asking me what the punishment for abortions would be or if women who have abortions should go to jail, then let me answer that. I would definitely put abortion as an act of murder, but I would only apply the punishment to the people who abort after it is made illegal. This is because many people don't see/realize its murder and putting them in jail for something they don't realize they did in my perspective would be unjustified.
You will notice I repeat myself a lot, but that's so I make myself as clear as possible. I am trying to demonstrate to you that abortion is murder and how one can not kill a human because its inconvenient. I am quite certain that I did so logically.
(Information showing Jail reports - "https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2019/08/26/arrests-report/" Number of Abortions "https://www.worldometers.info/abortions/", Number of physicians "https://www.ahrq.gov/research/findings/factsheets/primary/pcwork1/index.html" and Prison Cells- "https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/aug/28/prisons-holding-more-inmates")
I completely understand your reason for repetition and it is not a problem.
To add onto my argument- escaping your opinion on weather or not you choose to believe that it is murder-
As stated before approximately 100,000 women get abortions each year, as well as approximately 428,000 people who go to jail each year. Sure I understand what you mean that all past abortions are gonna be disregarded although who necessarily are you going to be arresting? The physicians who preforms the abortion or the client?? Better yet arrest both of them its just adding onto the 100,000 abortions preformed, 428,000 poisoners who are actually there for cold blooded murder (not abortion) and more 209,000 physicians-- which these numbers are just in the U.S. That comes to a total of approximately 163,700,0 people who would be going to jail. To think prisons are already holding more 7,300 more people than they were designed for- is your plan to just build more jails? Hope not because the world is already facing problems with spacing to put trash because landfills are piling up and putting them on death row is not an option if the population is already decreasing like butter sliding down a pan with covid-19 currently happening. So what's your plan now?
Not only is space in jails going to increase but teens under the age of 21 are already getting there hands on drugs and alcohol- who says they wont just rebel against the no abortion law like they did the legal drinking age being 21? Do it on the sidelines, same way people have managed with drugs- take whatever and all acts needed just to make sure "I cant have a kid at a young age" or "I cant afford getting kicked out my house".
I also have another question- is ejaculation considered murder as well because the sperm would nesisrly have an opportunity (as you stated you would have if you were brain dead and was on life support) And this sperm has the opportunity to become living as well. So is ejaculation also considered murder? Because, well, I don't believe anyone can actually go without ejaculation- just saying.
Punishment - As you mentioned, there will be an overload in jail cells and another question is asked which is who even gets arrested? The women or the doctor? or both? I agree that there wont be enough space in jail for all these people and you can not just build more. I personally don't believe in any current jailing system as most people end up back in jail. When writing this debate title I did not exactly think much on what the punishment should be rather I was thinking the because it murder it should be illegal. I would say that the doctors/physicians who preform these abortion, and would continue to do it illegally after the law is passed should in that case not go to jail but lose their medical license. This would completely discourage any doctor from risking abortion because to them the license is very important to them (Obvious reasons). This could be a reasonable punishment for a murderer. As for the mother, I would put jail time since if putting both doctors and mother in jail would as you said overcrowd prisons. But to be honest these are only a few ideas to what a punishment could look like in today's world. I personally fully disagree on how jail/prison systems are operated in general. I find them completely useless and ineffective to reform the prisoner. So although I would still make it illegal under the act of murder, I would not put the same punishments since the majority of people who abort do not actually realize it is murder. However, people would definitely refrain from having abortions if they saw that it was put under an act of murder.
Ejaculation - Now to answer your question on ejaculation and if its also murder or not. The answer is no it is not murder or killing in any way. This is because the sperm cells alone are just cells with data used for reproduction. Although they have a potential to develop a human being, they are currently not in the possess of doing so and there was no initiation from them. Once the sperm goes into the egg of a women, the zygote is formed starting the development a human being, but sperm and egg alone are not developing or initiated to do something that creates a living human. They are just single sperm cells that could be used but are not. Here is another analogy: If I had a nuclear power plant that creates energy, lets say that would be a sperm cell. The power plant does have the potential to create a nuclear detonation but doesn't until initiated. So by having a singular sperm cell by itself (in this case a nuclear power plant), then until its initiated to carry out a process that it has the potential of doing, it would be considered murder (in this analogy a nuclear detonation/explosion). So the potential of the sperm creating a living human is equivalent to the nuclear power plant having the potential to be a nuclear bomb. It is not a nuclear bomb, its a nuclear power plant. Sperm is not a baby developing, its a cell containing information to develop a human. This is a very weird analogy, I know, but it works. Men don't have babies in their balls, rather they have the genetic code to start development. Ejaculating and throwing the sperm into water or burning it would mean nothing as its not killing anything, its not in the process of becoming a living human being. Like a miscarriage, the baby stopped developing and will be unable to become a living human, thus it is completely dead. I hope you understand what I mean here.
Murder - Back to my main point that abortion is murder. I am not exactly sure why you say its an opinion while its a fact that I even demonstrated to you quite clearly (this is not meant to sound aggressive). Whats the difference between a baby who is about to become alive and human with the ability to be like us, a living human being, versus us who are currently alive. One is just not alive yet but soon will, and stopping that development is equivalent to murder. I hope your seeing the logic here. I am quite certain that my logic is not flawed as preventing a life from living is literally what murder is. Someone stopped me from living, they killed me. They stopped a baby/fetus/embryo from being able to live and be alive, they killed it.
Anyway I think I should of added another round to this debate, but otherwise thanks for debating with me.
Before I "recap" on my argument I would like to not only thank the instigator for making sure I understood there perspective- which in fact I did.
Is abortion be considered 100% murder?
No, abortion clearly is not considered murder because its not illegal yet. Why? Why is it not considered murder, because something that is living has a beating heart or voluntary breaths, pulsating umbilical cord and voluntary movement of their muscles- that means it has a possibility of surviving on its own. Well a fetus can not survive on its own, if the mother of the fetus is harmed which could be forms of physical abuse or even a simple drink with alcohol that could cause the fetus to either come out with problems or not even make it. Just to make it clear when I say make it im not saying in the womb, im saying when it is voluntarily breathing after being birthed.
The "founder" of the child's womb.
Through out this whole argument you've kept on restating your scientific claim about how abortion is eliminating a child's chance at being born- but what about the mother? A phrase most people would have heard by now is "No child should have had or should have to live through this". What does this saying mean? Before a child is born and even created- every mother thinks about whats best for themselves and for the baby. Sure say next time you should have used a condom or think before you have sex. Sometimes people aren't "permitted" with this decision, women have been raped, drugged which is also considered rape depending on the scenario- to preform the act of sex. Not only is being a mother hard but imagine having to your accidental child all alone with barely any money because the father or family members dont want to support you. It is a females decision on what she decides to do with her body and if having that kid is not what she, either wants or can have in life then well its on her. Plus you cant forget the number of scenarios where the woman can be forced into getting an abortion which means that maybe it wasn't all her choice to take that action of abortion and her partner forced her too. These are all things that should be considered before having the consequence being putting a person in jail. No I am not saying any of these things because im a woman- im just stating the other side of the story. (the story being the carrier of the child).
Lets say abortion does become illegal. Pro says that they have yet to think about the aftermath of everything as in they believe putting the women in jail wont effect/help anything because it doesn't already. So what now? What other than jail will give these women the reasoning to realize and suffer that they killed there own child. (I am not targeting pro at all im just questioning if putting these women in jail is really necessary considering we dont know why these women did what they did). Because well is it not already a burden enough? Concluding what I have already represented in my past arguments is that the world doesn't have space for more inmates- heck the world barely has enough space for its own trash.
These are all things to think about before making abortion "privileges" legal. I thank pro for creating such an intriguing debate and I look forward to debating more.
While I doubt you'll ever agree abortion is a right; if you would ever like to discuss why it's not murder, I would be glad for the opportunity to try to enlighten you.
I just realized and it must have been my computer- no worries I know the difference between rapped and raped.
'Literally a different way of saying "I killed someone" is "I stopped them from living".'
This weirdly reminds me of a serial killer who thought he figured out the perfect crime by destroying the bodies in acid. He even confessed to it, believing that to be charged with murder required a corpse.
Not penalizing this, but there was a funny S&G error:
"I would like to ask you what you think it would be like to have a reminder that you were rapped inside of you."
The word you meant was raped. Granted, I once did a whole debate on the distinction.
I find the argument on either side as superfluous. Abortion is, by established law, a legal procedure. That law, by the way, is not Roe v Wade  because it did not establish law by precedent, it merely decided it was a State-controlled issue, not Federal,and authorized States to make law consistent with their decision that abortion was legal. Some states already had such state law, but some had no law on the subject, and some had to revise current law to align with the Roe decision.
However, if I participate in voting on this debate, I will vote only on the basis you your relative arguments, as if there was no current legalizing law.
Now that I think about it, not life in jail as most people who have abortions don't see it as murder, but if a law is passed making it illegal, then abortions that are proceeded after it is made illegal would deserve life in prison with parole. That's what I think but I haven't thought too much on what the exact punishment should be.
So you'd advocate life in jail without parole for abortion? Then you'll have a lot of people in jail.
The same punishment as murder, maybe less since people dont realize its murder.
How would you punish it?