(Resolved)On Balance:Middleclassandrichwomenwho get abortions past their first trimester are selfish

I really laughed a lot while reading the last argument. It seems like Pro thinks insulting his adversary will make him win. Or maybe he thinks that insulting me will make me cry like a baby and concede the debate. Well this will not happen.I have to emphasise the hostile attitude of Pro, using terms such as "retarded", "pathetic", "bullsh*t", "idiotic mongoloid", and others. This is a flagrant violation of the rules and should be taken into account by the judges. This violation of the rules is almost like forfeiting the whole debate, so I have won by now, but let's value sportsmanship and refute the pseudo argument Pro posted."Oh, I'm SURE those pathetic killers would like you to THINK they care about their unborn baby. However, this is almost never the main reason why women get abortions. They are ALMOST ALWAYS thinking of themselves"This is all subjective information. Not valid.Pro then tries to invent a contradiction in my argumentation: "I will now point out that Con has contradicted him/herself."One of the worst thing that could happen to someone is having parents who don't love him. If a mother is conscious that she won't love that baby that will born nearly, It's nonsense to bring him to the world." In his/her next argument, Con says this:"I've never argued that this reasoning was logical or morally correct." BULLSHlT. I'm aware that in the second round Con makes a (failed) attempt to defend this statement in the next quote."I know that if those mothers can give their babies in adoption instead of killing them, because they will find someone that adopts them and loves them. However, we are not discussing the moral implications of abortion, just the selfish aspect." There is one thing that is very wrong with this statement.1. Con states that "One of the worst thing that could happen to someone is having parents who don't love him. If a mother is conscious that she won't love that baby that will born nearly, It's nonsense to bring him to the world.I would like to point out this part of Con's statement specifically:"One of the worst thing that could happen to someone is having parents who don't love him. If a mother is conscious that she won't love that baby that will born nearly, It's nonsense to bring him to the world."Con is saying that it is nonsense to bring a child into the world if they are unloved. They are not saying that this is what the mother thinks, they are saying that this is what they think. " Let's organize this. I first said what mothers think, then I said what I personally think. How is that contradictory?? In this debate I'm defending what abortive mothers think, not what I think. Anyway, I conceded that the mothers line of reasoning was flawed, but to show that's not what we are talking about. We are debating if mothers are selfish, not if they are intelligent.""Only in the green countries mothers can have abortion, in the others abortion only happens if it is the only way to save a mother's life."Do I need to repeat myself? I said "FIRST WORLD COUNTRIES". "So Pro here assumes that in countries where abortion is legal there exists an "abortion tourism". This is far from truth."Sources please? I don't need to provide any because it is a well known fact that "abortion tourism", as you like to call it, occurs on a daily basis. Even Pro Choicers know this. "In countries where abortion is legal the government does not allow tourists to get abortions."You mean illegal, right? You are correct, but this doesn't mean that women don't get abortions in those countries anyways."You must be a citizen, living in the countries and you also have to pass certain tests."This depends on the country you are talking about"Come on!! Read the law texts please!! Pro wants sources, let's give him sources: USA's law, UK's law, Uruguay's law, Canada's law...""Three-fourths of women cite concern for other individuals."Oh, I'm sure they do, to an extent. However, there are two reasons why this argument is innefective in supporting Con's point of view.This is the definition of selfish that is used in this debate:"Lacking consideration for others; concerned chiefly with one"s own personal profit or pleasure"."Pro made some jokes again. 3/4 of women cite concern for others. Then he reminds us of the definition of selfishness: "Lacking consideration for others". How are mothers selfish if they do not lack consideration for others? How is my argument ineffective??"You do realize that the "o" and "i" keys are next to each other, right? "You do realize that you can read your argument twice to check for errors, right?? Didn't they teach you that on school??"let's look at some of your grammar errors. "they are thinking in the others, they are not being selfish.""Then, nearly a bit less than half of the globe rather than in most countries." "As an English teacher I can confidently say there's no error in those statements. But maybe Pro is costumed to bad writing, so my god writing bothers him, I don't know...."On balance does not mean ALL."On balance means to conclude, in conclusion, to sum up, summarizing.... On balance is a conclusion mark. So basically the resolution is that you conclude Middle class and rich women who get abortions past their first trimester are selfish. That means all women. If you didn't want to say so then you would have written something like "almost all middle class bla bla bla" or "nearly all blablabla" or "some middle blablabla". But you didn't, so I have to assume you are talking about all the category of middle class and rich women who get abortions past their first trimester.ConclusionThis women are not being selfish. As I showed earlier, they are think about the others when they take such a significant decision. They think about their baby, their family, their boyfriend, and other individuals. Then how is it that they are selfish if they think about others??Is this decision morally correct? Maybe it isn't, but we are not discussing that here. Is this line of thinking smart? Maybe it isn't, but again, this is out off topic. I refuted all of Pro's argument, and he has the burden of proof, so that is enough. However, I also made my own arguments against the resolution. As well as this, I always wrote in a polite fashion, while Pro was insulting and rude, breaking the rules of the site.So, On balance, Middle class and rich women who get abortions past their first trimester are not selfish.Sources for the whole debate:- Common sense- Induced Abortion in the United States (2014) Guttmacher Institute- Re-thinking Abortion: Psychology, Gender and the Law (1997) Mary Boyle- Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905) Sigmund Freud- The Ego and the Id (1923) Sigmund Freud Good luck for my opponent! Cheers!