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

Oh wonderful, a retarded "debater" who twists what I say to fit their agenda.1- 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(1). Also, if Con had actually read my argument instead of skimming it, they would see that the beginning of my argument was addressing this: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. 2- "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.3-"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.1. 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". Most rich/middle class women who get abortions are doing so CHEIFLY for their own benifit, most of the time at the overall expense of the child.4- (It's funny that you even made this into a contention) Oh what ever shall I do, I misspelled the word "voila". You do realize that the "o" and "i" keys are next to each other, right? "'Et viola'""Is "et voilà", please don't pretend to know French when you don't."I studied French for three years, but 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." "2- Illegality problems" (WTF is an "illegality problem"?)5-"Lastly, I want to emphasise the generalising nature of the resolution. Pro is stating that all middle class and rich women who get abortions past their first trimester are selfish." You forfiet this debate.This is the resolution:"(On balance)Middle class and rich women who get abortions past their first trimester are selfish". Pro nor Con may not change or attempt to change this resolution."On balance does not mean ALL.By attempting to change the resolution, you have violated rule 2."The resolution is negated."Mhm. I'm SURE the resolution is negated. You get a gold star. Since you probably didn't notice, that was sarcasm. Idiotic mongoloid. It took you TWO DAYS to write that poorly written "argument". Do really I need to mention that you haven't used any sources of any kind whatsoever in your past two pathetic excuses for rebuttals? Probably not (it's more than you deserve), but I'm doing it anyways.Source for contention 1:http://www.guttmacher.org...