Personal tools

Talk:Debate: Abortion

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Click on the "+" tab above to add a comment, or just click "edit". Sign your comment by writing "~~~~" at the end. Join us on Facebook for broader community discussion.

Comments by User ProChoice August 13th 2010

Abortion is the beginning of human rights for women.

Birth control can fail, be not available and there is rape.

There is no chance to plan a life, to follow oneĀ“s own path without the right to have no children - whatever happens, to at least limit the damage to not pass anything bad on to a next generation.

(Feelings of having something good to pass on are nice, but they cannot be enforced)

The statistics point to the Planned Parenthood argument, but who does always talk principles?


This socalled "right to life" does not work. I never had any rights.

Genetics: from a wreck, and a rapist - I have two confirmed genetic illnesses and several others.

Imprint: How could the raped wreck protect me? She could not protect herself!

Resources: Nobody can give anything - rights or things - (s)he does not have.

Nemo plus iuris transferre potest quam ipse habet - a principle in law anywhere EXCEPT abortion.


The more patriarchal a country, the more hindrances to abortion.

And each rapist, whose behaviour and propaganda are recorded, wanted cattle of his own species - breeding machines for his genetic trash, AND no responsibility to provide resources. (ALSO personal experience)


I have never even understood, what that "dignity" is supposed to be!

I am a product of rape and a still existing abortionforbidding law.

I could not get out of poverty, sickness and violence.

So, please, other side, what should that be, that "dignity" I NEVER had?

User comment

i oppose the legalization of abortion. As you can see, many women are pvery prone to this kind of situation and decision especially teenagers or young ladies who got pregnant so its their responsibility to take care of that child because they made and they decide to make the baby so they must take that risk. If you got pregnent because of rape then still you must take the risk, you know how important child is to oneself and you're not 100% sure that if you'll abort it your life is safe. Some women will have disease or more like they died during this kind of deadly process to her. The child has the right to live because that human it is the unison of male and female and you don't know what that child can do or he/she may take a very important part of your life that can improve you to be a better perosn or change into a better person. So there are many possibilities that abortion will be a bad part to our lives.

Comments by User:Doc

I didn't read my own personal views spelled out so I thought I'd share them.

1) An embryo/fetus/baby has 23 pairs of unique chromosomes and is undeniably 'alive'. 2) However, I do not believe 'personhood' is possible without the capacity to 'think' (or feel). For example, a breast cancer may have a unique set of chromosomes and is undeniably 'alive' but really isn't a person or have a potential to be a person. 3) The brain development requires synaptic connections in an organized fashion and the appropriate electrical activity for consciousness to occur. Physiologically, when someone falls 'unconscious' brain wave activity minimizes (although still present). 4) Brain wave activity is not observable until 120 days (about four months or the first trimester). Without brain waves, the embryo/fetus is a potential person. 5) A potential person should be protected and valued by the state and be afforded certain rights against abuse. However, these rights of a potential person should not supercede the rights of an actual person.


If the woman wants to have an abortion then why try to have a kid in the first place? Also protection can easily have prevented this.

Stupid people

I say just stay away from it all until you actually want a kid instead of being "ignorant" in the first place. Don't kill a kid just because you didn't want it. If you didn't want it, don't do it!--Bizzy 12:27, 28 May 2009 (CDT)

Comment by User:Dawon1547

Babies have their right to survive, and if their parents take a way of abortion, it is a unethical behavior same as killing one person, who's innocent. It cannot be the behavior that expectent mothers and fathers do to their own babies. Even we don't argue with a ethical problems, how can they get rid of their precious member of their own family?

re organize

Criticism of an argument should not go under the main page... you should be able to click on the argument to find reasons to agree and disagree with it. For instance this:

"The "dialysis" analogy is invalid; pregnancy is unique One of the most famous arguments against abortion is the "dialysis analogy" put forward by Judith Jarvis in 1971. It compares abortion to a situation in which a healthy woman (the mother by analogy) is attached to a dying patient (the fetus by analogy) in order to keep the dying patient alive. The concept is that the dying person does not have a right to the woman's body, and that the woman has a right to "unplug" (abort) even if it means the death of the other person. The problem with the analogy is many fold: 1. A woman and a fetus have a special relationship that is incomparable to that between a woman and a stranger or even a relative. There is a special biological drive inside the mother to keep the baby alive and a dependency by the baby on the mother. The mother, therefore, has a special responsibility to keep her child alive and not abort; 2. A woman often gives a form of tacit approval to the existence of a fetus in her womb: the act of engaging in sexual behavior; 3. abortion directly kills the embryo and does not merely "unplug" and let it die. These are critical differences that invalidate a classic, central argument for abortion."

Should all go on a sub page.

Myclob 10:33, 27 December 2010 (EST)

Also, this really needs to link to other debates. For instance does the end justify the means? We should also have a debate about the affect on society: is legal abortion result in net good or net bad... This should link to the definition of good and bad.

Didn't see anything about states rights

Shouldn't a major portion be about Roe vs. Wade, and what would happen if it went away?Myclob 22:35, 1 October 2011 (EDT)

Each state should be able to set its own Abortion policy

  1. If abortion corrupts societies, we should be able to see that states that don't allow abortion, will do better. If abortion laws harm a state, than we should see it.
  2. The 10th Amendments provides that powers not granted to the national government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution of the United States are reserved to the states or the people. The constitution says nothing about Abortion, so it should be left to the states.
  3. We should only make national laws when more than 80% of people agree. When society has not decided about abortion laws, we should leave it to the states. (Look good? If so I'll post it...)

Myclob 18:00, 2 October 2011 (EDT)

re: "Women must control their bodies or risk becoming servants of the fetus"

I don't get it... this argument, is set up as a reason to support abortion rights, however to me it sounds like a pro-life argument... "You can really really wish that having sex didn't create life, but it does, and once you do, you can't get rid of it. It doesn't feel good to get stuck with something that you didn't think would happen to you. It might not seem fair, when other people don't get pregnant, but when you take that risk, once you start the life, you can't just get rid of it... If you are not ready to be a parent, you should give an unwanted baby up for abortion. Parents are slaves to their kids... it might suck, but that is the way it is." Myclob 22:06, 2 October 2011 (EDT)

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits