Abortion should be made illegal!?

Question

Tomorrow, we're going to have a debate in speech class. I was wondering what I could use because it's about abortion being illegal and I'm one of the people that are FOR THAT (it was assigned by the teacher). We're supposed to use evidence and facts and all. We're also supposed to ask questions that may stump the ones against making abortion illegal.

What questions can I ask?
&What can I say to fight?

The ones against making abortion illegal will also be asking questions toward me (the one who WANTS to make abortion illegal). So she said to be prepared. But I have no clue what questions they might ask. Any Ideas?

Thank you!

Answer 1

YOu've got a hard case there.... ok as for the questions theres NOTHING you can do and its better iif you dont, let them come and the answers will come too. As for your arguement work with moral impression dont mention the mother too much unless saying how careless, selfish etc look it at the babies point of view and keep making it sound like a real baby and murder. i personally think an abortion would be the best thing ever if i was pregnant and not married or in serious realationship and would do it without second though.

Answer 2

I am so pro-choice. I think abortion should be legal, but I'll try to go by both sides.
My side (who thinks abortion should be legal will say:)
1) What about evidence that shows the crime rate dropped dramatically when abortion was legalized? How do you respond to this? - (When less women gave birth to children they could not afford, we saw a decrease in economic hardship and a decrease in crime - do a google to get facts on this)
2) How will you avoid "black market abortions" When abortion was illegal, many desperate women sought out abortions that were performed illegally. This led to severe injury of the women, and potential loss of a child's mother.
3) What right do you have to impose your religious / personal beliefs on someone else's body?

I am very pro-abortion being legal. I don't know how you could stump me. I guess you could say, "How do you justify allowing someone to kill another human being - regardless of its age?"
You could also argue the following - when my side says "You cannot tell a woman what to do with her body"
So you could respond, what if a woman wants an abortion when her baby is a fetus of 8 months old. This is obviously illegal, so why should we discriminate against a 1 month old fetus and allow that to be aborted?

Good luck - I'm sure you will do well
Check www.wikipedia.org - they're the best source

Answer 3

Why is it abortion before the baby is born, but murder once it is born? Has the DNA changed? Has the unborn person become a differant person once it has left the mother's body? No, it is the same person.

The more research that is done the more conclusive it is that unborn babies feel. Unborn babies experience. It was recently prooven that the abortion process is excruciatingly painful upon the baby.

The political reality is that the Law of the Land is such that abortion is legal...but any woman with a brain should be able to find a better form of birth control.

Abortion is just as much murder as if you put a bullet through its head after being delivered...it just is. No one can ever convince me otherwise. It was a human before being aborted...it would be a human if brought to full term.

Why do so many mothers play music for the unborn baby...there is an entire industry on music for the unborn baby to stimulate them.

Good Luck.

Answer 4

The most important thing to remember is to stay on topic. Pro-abortion advocates tend to throw a ton of ideas out and distract people, but keeping the conversation about the issue is the most important thing you can do.

It's useful to remember this question: Daddy, can I kill this? it seems like an absurd question but is essential to the issue. Before we kill something we must be sure what it is we are killing. When a toddler comes into the room and asks you "Daddy, can I kill this?" what are you going to respond with (this may be something you ask your opposition)? Hopefully one would ask "What is it?"

The answer is the key part. In the case of the toddler, we look at what "this" is. If it is a bug, then the answer is "Yes." If it's the dog, then "No," and if it's the neighbor, then it's "let's call a psychologist!"

With abortion it's the same thing. If it's just a mass of tissue, then abortion is just fine. However, if abortion kills a human being it's an indeffensible act.

And that's the premise of the anti-abortion argument, that abortion kills and innocent human being, and that, since killing human beings is objectively wrong, abortion is objectively wrong.

Pro-aborts will bring up issues like a child being born into poverty, being addicted to drugs, having a hard life, etc. But the key thing to ask is "Would this activity be permissible with newborn children?" Remember our first question, "Daddy, Can I kill this?" Well after we establish what it is (a child) we draw comparisons between it and other circumstances. This is called the trot-out-the-toddler tactic. Let me give and example:

Pro-abort: But what if the child will be born into poverty?

Pro-lifer: That's still no excuse. You wouldn't condone killing born children in poverty, would you?

Pro-abort: But that's different.

Now as you can see, this brings up the issue of differences between abortion and other circumstances. There is an easy way to remember the differences, it's called the SLED Test.

SLED stands for:

Size
Level of Development
Environment
Degree of Dependency

These are the only differences between a born and unborn child. So let's apply this concept to finish our previous conversation:

Pro-abort: But that's different!

Pro-lifer: Well, how is it different?

Pro-abort: Well, the baby is so small! It's like... the size of my finger nail. (an untrue statement, btw)

Pro-Lifer: But how does that justify killing it. My mother is much smaller than me, but does that mean she has more rights?

Pro-abort: Well....

The key thing is to focus on the fact that abortion kills a child. If pro-aborts have to justify killing children, they will fail, because it is impossible to justify. This is not deceiptful because this is exactly what abortion is.

That said, the most important thing on our side is pictures of aborted babies. It is impossible to rationalize the slaughter depicted in them. And, try as they might, and justifications given will be shot down within the minds of your middle-of-the-road audience, and even some of your pro-choice audience. Pictures were used to humanize all sorts of atrocities and violations of human right. Pictures of Emmit Till were used to launch the civil rights movement in the US. Pictures of slaughtered Jews were used to explain the evils of Nazi Germany. Pictures of dead soldiers were used to build support against the Veitnam war.

Pictures are our most powerful tool. The best source for abortion pictures is www.AbortionNO.org

Answer 5

You might argue that when the Roe VS Wade U.S. Supreme Court decision came down in 1973, women didn't have as many options for birth control and family planning as they do today
Also, having a baby out of wedlock was more frowned upon back then. Many a young woman Had abortions in the 70's because the father of the baby wouldn't marry them. Being pregnant and unmarried (even if you gave the baby up for adoption) could have negative effects on a girl's future. Many times she had to drop out of school when she began to show
and never returned to finish her education. There was still a stigma surrounding unwed mothers to be.

Today, there's not nearly as much stigma so any excuse of being ostracized as a reason for being pregnant doesn't hold much water. Again, responsible young women have more choices in birth control thus lowering the odds of getting pregnant.

Having said all that, however, I do believe abortion should be legal especially in the cases of rape, incest and danger to the mother's health. But being legal doesn't mean abortion can be morally justified either, especially if it's used for "convince" sake.

Answer 6

Well I will tell you what I would ask you-
One is.. what would you say about women who are brutally raped, incest victims, and if the pregnancy was going to harm or kill the mother
The other is.. making abortion illegal will not make that mother care anymore for that baby... so we would have many more babies born with HIV, neonatal herpes, AFS, and many other horrible diseases and defects- there would be many more babies born addicted to drugs, there would be many more babies thrown in dumpsters, thrown off bridges, thrown in the trash... making abortion illegal in my opinion would be more devastating to those newborn babies.
We live in a world with many types of different people, people with mental problems, evil people, people that don't care - no two people are the same... so taking that into account.. why would you want a baby to be born into this world only to suffer and possibly die- wouldn't the lesser of the two evils be better?

Answer 7

They'll probably try to say that unborn babies aren't people. The response to that is the obvious fact that they are. They'll say that women should have reproductive rights. The proper response is that rights belong only to individuals and consist of the rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness, from which all others are derived. Because aborting babies violates the baby's right to life, it can't be a right. The only counterargument for that is that abortion consists of a woman exercising her right to property, but you could point out that that implies that partial birth abortions of babies that could survive outside of the womb should be illegal.

Arguments like this should work pretty well.

Answer 8

Whatever you don't mention God or any other Deity. You'll just look uniformed. I'm assuming you've read Roe V. Wade . . . One of the conditions is that the fetus must be able to maintain life without medical intervention (life support, ventilators) . . . for legal purposes this is how the Supreme Court is defining "life." I'm not sure if your old enough to remember Dr. Kevorkian but pull his name on line. Certain states (start with Washington and Texas) are allowing medically assisted suicide on people who are not hooked up to medical equipment (therefore legally alive) and this is not considered murder . . . while other states do consider it murder to forcibly remove patients hooked up to feeding tubes and other medical devices even though Roe V. Wade does not recognize them as alive. Remember, this debate is not about morals or religion but about how this country recognizes "life." Their are plenty of inconsistencies . . .

Answer 9

Im sorry but to the person who said "I'd never kill an infant myself, but no it shouldn't be made illegial." An infant is a baby that is from the age of newborn, to about 1 year old. When you have an abortion, you are killing a fetus...not an infant...

Anyway, one of your arguments can be whether the fetus is an actual human life with a soul or not...this is a tough one

Answer 10

Well, it depends on the person. I, myself am extremely religious!!! I am Christian and I very, very much dislike abortion, and not even in the situation of a rape would I kill an infant, all lifes are blessings!!! Also, I look at it like this; if I go and kill my brother thats murder. Murder is illegal. What is killing my baby? Or what could be? What if your mother aborted you? What then? I hate abortion. Its murder, and it's sick.