Abortion and Libertarianism

I am positive that we will have an interesting discussion and that we will both learn from this debate. As pro, I am affirming the resolution that all libertarians ought to be abortion advocates. My opponent is negating. The burdens in this debate weigh more heavily on pro since I am challenging something that is already accepted amongst most libertarians. And yes, by no semantics, I mean no unfair semantics. Framework The framework that I will be presenting will evidently be a libertarian one. Voters should keep in mind that to affirm I must prove the following points: The fetus is not alive. To deny someone an abortion is to deny them of their human rights. Abortion is not murder. If I am able to prove that the fetus is not living, then I am able to prove that the termination of the fetus is not the termination of an individual. This is key to my case since abortions value the individual heavily in society as the definition states. Since libertarians want to minimize government restriction, this means that if I am able to prove that abortion is a denial of human rights, then I am able to prove that the government will be restricting their people of their human rights and this is a violation of libertarian ideology. Similarly to my first goal, if I am able to prove that abortion is not murder, then I am to demonstrate that we are not killing anybody and due to this, individualism is not violated and neither is libertarianism. Is the fetus living? Biologists have compiled a list of 7 signs that indicate whether something is alive or not [1]. If even one of these requirements is not met, then the fetus cannot be classified as living [1]. The list is as follows: Movement: The fetus can move. Respiration: The fetus is unable to respire independently [2]. Sensitivity: The fetus is not able to do this until 28 weeks which goes beyond the definition of abortion for this debate [3]. Growth: The fetus does grow. Reproduction: The fetus cannot reproduce [4]. Excretion: This is extremely rare and the baby will be severely physically disabled if it happens at this stage [5]. Nutrition: The fetus is unable to independently consume nutrition [2]. If even one of these was not met then the fetus would not be considered to be living. The fetus only completely made 2 of these. Making it scientifically considered to be nonliving. Since the fetus is not living, libertarians ought to teach that the termination of the fetus is not wrong under libertarian ideology. Abortion, Rights and Choice Pregnancies have a huge impact upon people’s lives - in particular the mother. As Sarah Weddington stated: “A pregnancy to a woman is perhaps one of the most determinative aspects of her life. It disrupts her body. It disrupts her education. It disrupts her employment. And it often disrupts her entire family life. ” (6) She continued: “[And we feel that], because of the impact on the woman, this … is a matter which is of such fundamental and basic concern to the woman involved that she should be allowed to make the choice as to whether to continue or to terminate her pregnancy. ” (6) This was a very important case showing that without the right to a termination, you are denying women a right and therefore what my opponent is advocating is gender inequality. The philosopher, Judith Thomson said: “If abortion rights are denied, then a constraint is imposed on women's freedom to act in a way that is of great importance to them, both for its own sake and for the sake of their achievement of equality . .. . and if the constraint is imposed on the ground that the foetus has a right to life from the moment of conception, then it is imposed on a ground that neither reason nor the rest of morality requires women to accept, or even to give any weight at all. ” (6) This emphasizes my previous point in regards to the denial of gender rights and equality and therefore we come to the following conclusion: P1: Denying women an abortion is gender inequality P2: Gender inequality is a violation of human rights C1: Abortion legalization stops gender inequality rights This makes up a significant portion of my offense. Since abortion denies human rights, it puts restrictions on people which, by definition, is a direct violation of libertarianism. Furthermore, it also directly violates individualism since the women is not receiving her rights and as a result a denial to an abortion is to deny the individual of her rights. Libertarians (as already described), are individualists and therefore this violation stands against the entire principle of libertarianism. Even if you do not buy that this is gender inequality and you do not buy that this is a restriction, you still ought to presume Pro since by denying people the right to an abortion, you are denying approximately 42 million people an abortion. This is such a huge violation of libertarianism that it holds enough weight for you to vote Pro alone. If the libertarian truly believes in minimizing government restriction, then the libertarian would not deny 42 million people the right to an abortion. Mother’s Life “The risk of death associated with childbirth is about 10 times as high as that associated with abortion. ” (7) This means that in almost ANY circumstance, an abortion is safer than a pregnancy - even if the abortion is for reasons unrelated to health. For a libertarian to deny an abortion in almost ANY circumstance, the libertarian is essentially increasing the probability of death in the pregnancy and this is again, a restriction being put upon the mother who should have a choice but now does not. This lack of choice could cost this person their life and this is a clear infringement of both individualism and libertarianism due to the restrictions and death increased probability of the death of an individual. Underage Teenagers “19% of teens who have had sexual intercourse become pregnant each year. 78% of these pregnancies are unplanned. 6 in 10 teen pregnancies occur among 18-19 year olds. ” (7) This statistic is extremely significant for many reasons. Firstly, if this occurs amongst 18 - 19 year olds then this is extremely bad. Having to look after and care for a child ruins their chances of going to college / university. Your twenties are your most important period of your lives according to many sources (8,9,10). Having to look after a child in this period of time is extremely stressful and prevents you from getting proper qualifications and more importantly, it prevents you from getting a full time job and a house. Children are extremely expensive to have and having a child at the time when you should be looking for a job makes income problematic. On top of this you will have to pay huge amounts of money. “To raise a child born in 2013 to the age of 18, it will cost a middle-income couple just over $245,000, according to newly released estimates from the U. S. Department of Agriculture. That's up $4,260, or almost 2%, from the year before. ”(11) Now let's compare this to the average income of a family: “The typical U. S. households pulls in $51,371 per year. ” Now teenage parents are most likely to make a lot less than this but let's take this statistic anyway. Assuming that this ‘average’ family spend no money at all on anything. It will still cost them almost 5 times their yearly income to equate to that amount. Of course they will need food, clothes, mortgage, heating, electricity etc. on top of this sum of money. Now if this seems like a lot you should double the cost of a child figures (assuming that they have another child), what will you do then? Not allow an abortion? Allow these teengagers to pay almost $500,000, earning (most likely) less than $51,371 per year. Now let’s put this into the context of both libertarianism and individualism. A libertarian (as per the definitions), is values the individual in society. Is it reasonable for somebody who values the individual in society to then take away the most important time in that individual's life? The rational and reasonable answer to that question is no. By taking away the most important period in that person’s life, you showing a lack of respect to the individual (thus violating individualism) and you are restricting their educational opportunities (thus violating libertarianism) [12]. Conclusion To conclude, I have demonstrated that by not being supportive of an abortion, libertarians violate their core ideologies. As well as this, they violate individualism which is, arguably, a belief so important to libertarians that without this belief you cannot classify yourself as a libertarian [13,14]. I once again thank Wylted for his acceptance to this debate. The resolution is affirmed. Vote Pro! Sources [1]. http://www.bbc.co.uk... [2]. http://www.babycenter.com... [3]. http://able2know.org... [4]. http://www.sexualityandu.ca... [5]. http://www.ask.com... [6]. http://www.bbc.co.uk... [7]. http://web.mit.edu... [8]. http://bigthink.com... [9]. http://www.forbes.com... [10]. http://elitedaily.com... [11]. http://money.cnn.com... [12]. http://www.cruxnow.com... [13]. https://en.wikipedia.org... [14]. https://en.wikipedia.org...