Choose Any Topic!

This round is solely dedicated to rebuttals to each other's case as per the rules stated in R1. Observation 1 This is merely an assertion however I do agree that murder is wrong. I’m not exactly sure why murder has been brought into this since it is evident that the fetus is not alive and therefore the termination of the fetus should not be considered as murder. Murder is defined as: “the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.” [1] The fetus is not a human being (as described in my contentions). Observation 2 Now this is where fetus life is attempted to be explained by my opponent. My opponent’s case is dependant on evidence from members of authority. My opponent has not explained why this evidence is credible in any way other than that ONE doctor said that abortion is wrong and the fetus is alive. Now onto my counter arguments A - Firstly, a fetus is not a human because it is not capable of doing things that humans are able to do. This is like stating that a corpse is a human because it has been a human and once possessed human attributes. It no longer possess these attributes and therefore should no longer be considered as the person that it previously was. [2] B - My arguments pre-refute this argument but nevertheless, I will expand. Since my arguments refer to MRS GREN, I will make a comparison to put this into my opponent’s perspective in order to refute their case further. Viruses depend on host cells. [3] The fetus depends on its mother. [4] The comparison between the virus and the mother is undeniable. The virus is scientifically considered to be not alive. [3,4] Therefore, the comparison allows us to put this analogy into the perspective of the fetus. Rebuttal 1: Abortion is Murder Now firstly, I would like to point out that at the very minimum my opponent has lost themselves the conduct point. I will quote from my opponent: “ Is the fetus human or not? And the pro gave no evidence.” Now, this is problematic for their case. They have made a rebuttal in the round solely dedicated for arguments. It can be argued that a rebuttal is a type of argument however it is evident that rebuttals and arguments can be distinguished in this scenario since there are separate round for rebuttals and arguments. This shows us that they are separate things. My opponent’s arguments is an attempt at a mitigation of my case and this is clearly against the R1 structure. Telling me that abortion is illegal is pointless. The debate is in regards to a legalization and this means that I have acknowledged that it is currently illegal in various parts of the world. As well as this, an abortion is legal in many parts of the world too and this debate is not specific to any area of the world in particular so stating that an abortion is illegal in one part of the world is almost pointless in regards to its impact on the resolution. I could easily say that abortion is legal in the UK [5] (which is where I come from) but I didn’t because I acknowledged that this is not specific to any part of the world. Now I will refute what my opponent said about in regards to my argument not being backed up by scientific evidence. My opponent made a rebuttal on this point in the arguments round so they lose conduct however since I am merely rebutting their rebuttals round, any rebuttals that I make regarding this point do not have a negative impact upon my case. My point was backed up by the BBC. Now in case my opponent is now aware of how accurate the BBC really is, I will explain. The BBC is the largest british resource company which has the biggest TV, radio, school resource, news and weather reports that the british economy sees. [6] The BBC makes £8.3 billion yearly for the British economy and this is pounds, not dollars. In dollars that would be $12,401,860,000 for the economy alone. The BBC is considered to be one of the most reliable and factual sites on the internet! [7] I find it difficult to believe that my opponent understand the huge chunk of scientific fact that they quoted in their argument in regards to this contention. The reason for this being, simply, that there argument in no way whatsoever proves that abortion is wrong, immoral or should be legalized. All their arguments merely define key terminology and explain the scientific processes involved in human birth and foetus development. I agree that the embryo begins developing when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote but that doesn’t mean that the fetus is alive. I also agree that when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote. Human development does not equate to human life. Development is in regards to growth. Life is in regards to meeting all the life processes as my contentions describe not just growth. Rebuttal 2: We need to reproduce in order to sustain the human race. 2% of American women aged 15–44 have an abortion. [8] This is an extremely low statistic and will surely not cause us low population issues. My opponent’s argument is extremely short but includes a huge explanation in regards to sexual reproduction and Charles Darwin. On the subject of Charles Darwin, his ideals and beliefs actually result in the resolution being affirmed. Darwin believed in survival of the fittest. [9] If the mother cannot afford the baby then the baby will be subjected to a life of poverty and poor health care and education. This makes them unfit and under the Darwinian principle that my opponent brought up an abortion is necessary due to the fact that they are unfit. This intertwines with school / career concerns, relationship issues, rape and fetal health concerns. You cannot pick and choose elements of Darwinian beliefs. You either accept the Darwinian ideology or don’t accept it. Rebuttal 3:Women will hide rape with abortion I have no issues with my opponent’s statistics however my opponent merely asserts that abortions are the reasons for these statistics. The source never says that it’s the abortions fault that rape is unreported so much, as a matter of fact, rape cases are hardly ever aborted, as my diagram and this source suggests [10,11]. Therefore, assuming that all rape abortions are hiding it from society, this means that a maximum of 1% of abortion cases are used to hide or cover rape. The statistic is most likely lower and it is part of my opponent’s burden to show how abortions even coincide with their statistics provided in regards to this contention. Conclusion You ought to vote for the affirmative case based on strong arguments and strong rebuttals. My opponent has riddled rebuttals into his arguments round and therefore this justifies the loss of the conduct point at a minimum. Vote Pro based on this. Sources [1] https://www.google.co.uk... [2]http://www.debate.org... [3]http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu... [4]http://www.bbc.co.uk... [5]https://en.wikipedia.org... [6]http://www.telegraph.co.uk... [7]http://bbcmonitoringlibrary.com... [8]http://www.guttmacher.org... [9]https://en.wikipedia.org... [10]http://christiananswers.net...[11]Abortion: Politics, Morality, and the Constitution [Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1984], p. 283.