War on Women

I apologise for misunderstanding Con's arguments, although she could have made it clearer in round 1.From what I can gather, this debate is instead over whether the government should provide funding for planned parenthood for all of their services, including but not limited to the abortion procedure.Now I will address some of my opponent's points, then summarise my own arguments that explain why the government shouldn't provide funding for planned parenthood for all of their services.'I would like to point out some laws that have already been passed in the United States about abortion rights. In 1973, U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion during the Roe vs. Wade case, affirming the legality of a woman"s right to have an abortion under the fourteenth amendment to the constitution.'This is an 'appeal to authority' fallacy. Just because abortion is declared to be a right by law, this doesn't mean they are right. There have been many wrong laws throughout history, such as segregation, slavery and rape-within-marriage which were all legal.My point being, simply stating that abortion is legal has no bearing on whether it should be legal. Applying to this debate, stating that abortion is legal doesn't mean that the government is justified in funding it through Planned Parenthood.'The argument I was making was that if the government fails to fund for family planning services to the low-income and minority group in an outpatient clinic (which is less costly), it can lead to more financial burden on the government funded health care system such as the Medicaid program because these services will then have to be provided in the hospital, possibly in an emergency situation thus costing more to the tax payers.'Con is making a false dichotomy between:A) The government funds these servicesorB) Nobody funds these servicesBut there's a third option - Planned Parenthood fund them! Planned Parenthood brought in around $634 million in 2008, so they can use that to provide their services. They also have nearly $1 billion in net assets. Planned Parenthood is 'extraordinarily wealthy in its own right, and does not need tax dollars to continue to operate.'(1) Why should they be entitled to government funding for services they can fund themselves?'To ignore the statistics of abortion and say that if abortion is open and available then the frequency of abortion will increase is a naive misconception and a gross rejection of reality.'This is neither a 'naive misconception' or a 'gross rejection of reality'. It is a proven fact that restrictions on the availability of abortion decrease the frequency of them. I will present the evidence:Firstly, Poland heavily restricted abortion in in 1993, and consequently saw a drop from ~130,000 abortions per year in the mid-1980s to ~160 per year in 1999-2004. (2)Secondly, banning abortion would deter most women from having one. (3)Thirdly, in the US, a study concluded that the number of abortions decreased by 22.22% from 1990 to 2005, and wrote that 'one factor that played a role was the increased amount of anti-abortion legislation that was passed at the state level.' (4)Therefore, it is pretty conclusive that restricting abortion can decrease the amount of abortions; and likewise, making abortion more available will increase the amount of abortions.'it"s unconstitutional if the woman does not receive services that have already been established as her constitutional right to have an abortion under Roe vs. Wade.'She can still receive services that she has a 'constitutional right' for (there is no law preventing her from doing so), but this does not mean that the government should pay for her to receive such services. All Roe vs. Wade established was that it was unconstitutional to ban abortion; it places no obligation for the state to provide free abortions.'As my opponent so elegantly quoted, the UDHR, 'Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person', I would like to remind him that the woman also has that right to her life with liberty and security.'Abortion is a conflict between a foetus's right to life and a woman's right to liberty. In conflicts between individuals' rights, we have to ask who's rights are infringed the most. Abortion totally obliterates the foetus's life, liberty and security, whereas not having an abortion only infringes a little on the mother's liberty. Therefore, having an abortion violates more human rights to a greater degree than not having one, so abortion cannot be justified by appealing to a woman's right to liberty. The right to liberty establishes the right to do what you want so long as it doesn't harm others. As Zechariah Chafee wrote:'Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins' (5)In other words, a right to liberty is only a right up to the point at which it harms others. After this point, it isn't a right._________________________________________________________________________________________________________Finally, I would like to make a final argument why Planned Parenthood should be defunded for all services, based on the fact that funding Planned Parenthood's other services will indirectly fund abortion services.P1: The majority of the American electorate oppose their tax dollars being used for abortionP2: If the US government funds Planned Parenthood, the electorate's tax dollars will be used, albeit indirectly, for abortionP3: A US governmental action that goes against the will of the majority of the electorate is undemocraticC: The US government's funding of Planned Parenthood is undemocratic.P1 is true because polls show that 60-70% of taxpayers oppose their tax dollars being used for abortion. (6)P2 is true because government funding of Planned Parenthood frees up resources that are then used for abortion. (7)P3 is obviously true. A democracy is a government that acts according to the will of the people. Hence if it acts against the wishes of the majority will of the people, it is acting undemocratically.The conclusion logically follows from the premises. Since the funding of Planned Parenthood is undemocratic, it contradicts the entire status of the US government as a democratic government._________________________________________________________________________________________________________Back to you, Con!_________________________________________________________________________________________________________(1) http://www.sba-list.org...(2) http://www.johnstonsarchive.net...(3) Reardon, David - Aborted Women: Silent No More(4) http://www.jstor.org...(5) http://en.wikiquote.org...(6) http://articles.cnn.com...(7) http://www.npr.org...