WODC: Voluntary Abortion should be legal

1. Mistake's argument “Now Con just implies that abortion is wrong because "it ends the life" of the fetus. ” I’ve notice that throughout this whole debate my opponent has been ignoring and putting off this extremely important argument. I brought up the argument that Abortion is wrong because it kills a unborn baby who didn’t get a choice and he kept bringing up the response that abortion is not murder. Even if abortion isn’t murder she is still being killed. Her life has been ended because she is not wanted by her parents. “She didn't address any of my rebuttals of the argument or the murder issue. ” If you go back through my argument I never said killing a unborn baby is murder, I just stated what it is: Killing a unborn baby. As he brought it up, my opponent did not want this to be part of the debate and I respected that, leaving it out. But he continues to bring up that I dropped this point… like he asked me to. “Then she accepts that she doesn't accept abortion, not even in cases of rape. ” Rape is a terrible thing, I obviously do not advocate for it! But even though a baby is conceived in a horrible way, you should not punish her for that. If you will, unborn babies are like unicorn babies. Unicorns symbolize mystery, joy and enchantment. They are indescribable and extraordinary. To abort a child is to shoot the baby unicorn, but if you love and care for the child, you never know what hope it can bring to your life. It doesn't matter where that unicorn came from. All that matters is it now. “Then Con implies that abortion is the direct cause of the death, even after I showed cases of abortion where it doesn't happen. ” Abortion is the cause of death, if a unborn baby is pulled out of the womb before it can live it the open world and it dies, then abortion is absolutely the reason the babies die. Now as I said, the abortion that I am against in this debate is abortion that kills a unborn baby (when it is not done to save a mother’s life) not C-sections that help babies come out easier. 2. Bodily rights “Con seems not to understand the bodily rights' argument. Imagine two people, two adult living human beings. If person A needs a donation to survive, he can't force person B to donate his organs, his body, etc. But in no case B is killing A or affecting his right of life. Now in the case of abortion, the fetus has only one possible donor. If this possible rightly refuses to donate, then the fetus will die no matter what. This is not killing the fetus. Abortion never affects the right of life of a fetus. ” As I’ve already brought up, "We should be free to do with ourselves what doesn't harm others. ” If you create a life it is not our job to end it. It is our job to take responsibility for our actions and not harm others in the process. 3. Abortion as reproductive right “Remember that abortion never affects the right to life of anyone. Abortion is just refusing to make a donation, which is just. ” I still fail to follow this logic, if a life is living inside of you that you or someone created and then you kill it, doesn’t it effect their right to life? Yes, I know it would be more practical and kill your baby then keep it but is being practical more important than other human lives? No. 4. Security “Con claims that her sources are reliable because it has sources on it. ” No, actually, because they are credible sources, ones that have people with PHD’s behind them. Pro does not explain why his sources are more credible then mine. “I showed sources that anyone can read directly from the paper. Con is presenting a biased site with sources that I cannot read. ” You actually can read them. They’re copied from books onto the internet, word for word. Just because the sources are not accessible online it doesn’t mean they are wrong. And if you look up Pro’s site, it has a bias too. Everyone has a bias. “There is no reason to believe Con got the data from other place than the biased site. ” Pro decides to commit the ad hominine against the scientists who created these books and against myself. This behavior should equal a loss of conduct point. “After this Con drops all her other arguments. ” The reason I dropped all my other arguments is actually a really fun story, obviously not professional to tell in a debate like this, so if you are interested, PM me and I’ll tell you. Conclusion Pro continued to ignore the answers to his arguments. Con rebutted pro’s arguments and has presented a solid case against the legalization of voluntary abortion Thanks for the debate.