Debate

Abortion has always been a contentious issue and many women feel they should have control of their bodies. While an unwanted pregnancy does cause distress, this alone is not grounds to deem abortion an ethical solution to a deep social problem that we will continue to have if we simply solve it via abortion. If we become numb to the ethical implications of abortion could we also become numb to other forms of violence and unethical behavior?

However, while I do agree that human life is sacred, it is not this argument that I will put forth in our debate today. I will not even argue that the fetus is a human, which is the standard argument from a pro-life perspective. Instead I shall argue from the perspective of “potential futures”. By deeming abortion ethical, we are indeed robbing an unborn of her potential future. Why is murder wrong? I maintain that murder is wrong, among other things, because it robs us from what is rightfully ours – our unknown future. Indeed, why is the recent murder of 17 young men and women so tragic? Obviously it is a tragedy for those who loved these individuals. However, it is also a tragedy for young lives that were lost because they were robbed of their potential futures. This is what we mourn when a tragedy like this occurs. This is why we see it as unfair and unforgivable. And this is why abortion must also be seen in the same light.

You may argue that the fetus is not a human. You may argue that a fetus feels no pain. You may argue that abortion is a woman’s right. But none of you can argue against the fact that abortion puts an end to a potential human life, and of the experiences that those of us who not prevented from birth are lucky enough to have had.

There are other issues with the normalizing of abortion and we have already seen the consequences of this: unwanted pregnancies are treated as if it they are like a sickness. When we have a bout of flu, we simply go to the Doctor’s office and get treated. Similarly, when pregnant, we simply go to the Doctor to get treated. As a case in point nearly 650,000 abortions were performed in 2013. Only 22% of those were due to medical issues. The rest, we can assume, were just inconvenient pregnancies. The fact of the matter – that is the reality that a potential living and breathing (unique) individual is being prevented from what is rightfully hers - is all but clouded over by some kind of utilitarian justification that the mother’s life is more valuable than that of a voiceless future person. But this attitude creates a cold and heartless world. A world where self-interest always trumps our obligation to future generations. We have a duty to do the right thing and to ensure a rational outcome. What if every pregnant woman decided she wanted an abortion? If we were to universalize this, the entire human population would soon be extinct. It is our duty to respect the unborn’s potential future. Abortion, I argue, is murder for convenience.

It is my conclusion that abortion is unethical and will always remain so under all circumstances.

(this argument (without the obvious fallacies) is very loosely based on that of Don Marquis, Emeritus Prof. Philosophy at Kansas University)

PRO-CHOICE ARGUMENT

Opening statement - the main arguments from Judith Jarvis Thomson should be outlined (ensure you credit the author always).

Both sides must listen and look for logical fallacies, slippery slopes in the argumentation (ie: there is no way that all women would all want an abortion so this argument is a fallacy) and ensure you address the other’s arguments in your rebuttals.

(rebuttal: 2 or 3 rebuttals and then the conclusion. The conclusion is a shorter version of the opening statement).