Abortion: Constitutional or Not
All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.
With 2 votes and 2 points ahead, the winner is ...
- Publication date
- Last update date
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Voting system
- Open voting
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Four points
- Rating mode
- Characters per argument
I believe that Roe v. Wade was not Constitutional for it was not envisioned by the Founding Fathers or at any other time.
Con forfeited more than half the rounds. Conduct to con.
Pro clearly specified why abortion wasn’t constitutional. Specifically because it isn’t written in the constitution. This set up a nice easy softball for pro to bat out of the park simply by stating the text of the 9th amendment, and explaining that the role of the Supreme Court is to judge whether particular laws are constitutional or not; he could have simply stated, that the constitution empowered the Supreme Court to determine whether the right to privacy includes the right to Abortion (which they did), this in all respects this is constitution. There were a trillion ways this could have been argued, but Pro decided to take a bizarre approach and point of the rights outlined in the constitution makes abortion legal. This barely makes any sense to me, and certainly doesn’t qualify as a rebuttal of pros point.
However - it want refuted and given how little argument pro actually made - I’m not going to award points for arguments as neither side managed to refute each other, and there was not enough back and forth to be able to come up with any sort of weighting.
I'd like to start this debate by thanking both opponents,
Con ff the majority of the rounds leaving the entire debate abruptly ended. That's poor conduct!
All other points tied, the debate was so short it's hard to judge which argument is better. Not to mention the fact that Con's argument was mostly incoherent.