abortion

Alright well, Con's opening statement was um, to say the least, lack-luster? INITIAL REACTION; My opponent seems to not be "debating" but rather venting personal opinion to the general population. I would also like to take notice in the fact that my opponent's statement was not factually based in any sense, and could for all I know be complete fiction. (I am not doubting certain statements, rather I am emphasizing the point that my opponent provided no source to validate his statements) . I hope my opponent provides a more actual debate-structured statement next round rather than a simple paragraph releasing personal opinions and gruesome statements in an attempt to pull emotional appeal with, presumed fictional statements. REBUTTAL; Although my opponent provided a rather weak statement , because this is a debate is still deserves a rebuttal. My opponent says "ITS SO WRONG" (Not to be a grammar stickler, but *It's is correct grammar) when talking about abortion. Well, believe it or not your opinion isn't the only opinion, and just because you think something is wrong doesn't mean that it should be outlawed. I may think that sport cars should be outlawed because they're dangerous and I don't like them. I think that they are wrong. Now, until that I provide factual evidence and logical statements supporting my belief, who would take me seriously? Let alone make sports cars illegal just because I think that they are wrong. Am no way am I comparing sports cars to abortion, I am comparing two similar statements and the fallacy behind them. Just because you think that it is wrong, doesn't mean that we should make it illegal. Now, my opponent hasn't really given me much to debate on, so I will try and infer what my opponent is trying to portray, and points that they are trying to convey, and then debate off of those. My opponent talked about "murdered babies" when in fact "baby" when talking about abortion is unfortunately a subjective term. My opponent never defined "Baby" therefore I will. A baby, [Reference 1] is "a newborn or very young child" A baby [Reference 2] is " a very young human, particularly from birth to a couple years old or until walking is mastered" By these definitions, abortion is not the murdering of a baby, because the aborted being is not a baby. -In concession to my opponent (I found this fit and respectful to do) if my opponent checks my first source used in the definition above, they can find many other definitions for a baby, which they could use to help prove that the aborted child is indeed a baby. Abortion does not kill a baby, rather it ends a pregnancy. [2] Now, one may reply saying that to end a pregnancy, you must "end" a humans life. Then, you get in to the question of when human life begins. It is IMPOSSIBLE to for sure say when human life begins, that is a religious question and the beginning of human life cannot be proven. It's opinionated. [3] DISCLAIMER; Speaking of religion, I myself am a Christian. Do I favor abortion? Do I disagree? It's irrelevant. But, when researching how to be a better debater, I have learned its best to debate against yourself and your view. So am I truly Pro-Abortion? Who knows. But it's irrelevant in this debate, I just thought id throw that information in to this debate to prevent my opponent from using an "Ad-Hominem" logical fallacy technique against me. Thanks to my opponent and audience for reading, I eagerly await a response. [1] - Dictionary.com [2] - www.bbc.co.uk [3] - sites.google.com ( The abortion debater )