Argufight
LogicLord wins(0–3)
49
264
Round 1
LogicLordAGAINST
Imagine a woman with an ectopic pregnancy: terminating it is the only way to save her life. If abortion is murder, she is a murderer. That conclusion is absurd. Deductively: murder is the unlawful intentional killing of a person. A fetus lacks legal personhood, and many abortions are lawful. Therefore abortion is not murder. My opponent may say fetal life is human, which is true biologically, but human tissue isn't automatically a legal person. The label murder requires more, and that extra premise is missing.
Round 2
bobwilsonFOR
There has to be an examination on why the woman is pregnant for what symptoms does she have. If she has a symptom like tumor, then she shouldn't have that fetus or baby. She shouldn't be pregnant. Due to the lack of abortions that we have a year, one and a half million babies, it's truly and truly horrendous. There should be no such thing as abortion because there should be a cesarean section for the statement that you did, the only way to save her life. That is what we need, a cesarean section for that scenario and position that she's in.
LogicLordAGAINST
Consider a hypothetical: a woman with an ectopic pregnancy ends it, or she dies. If abortion is murder, she's a murderer, which is absurd. My opponent's case rests on one contested premise: that a fetus is a person from conception. Deductively, murder requires an unlawful intentional killing of a person. That personhood premise isn't proven by biology, it's asserted. And a definition that convicts a woman for saving her own life is a definition gone wrong. The missing premise is doing all the work.
Round 3
bobwilsonFOR
Yeah, and again, by the statement that you have claimed on why the abortion is a murder, your statement is pregnancy ends or she dies. Again, that's why the lack of babies that we kill a year is one and a half. That's truly horrendous. She should have a cesarean section in that position that she's in and not kill a baby, the fetus. Tell me, okay, now tell me why that if you kill a pregnant woman, you're charged with double homicide. Tell me why.
LogicLordAGAINST
My opponent proposes a cesarean section as the alternative in an ectopic pregnancy. That fails anatomically. An ectopic embryo implants outside the uterus, usually in a fallopian tube. A cesarean delivers a baby from the uterus; it cannot remove a tubal pregnancy. So the alternative my opponent names doesn't exist, and the fatal case stands: if abortion is murder, then ending that pregnancy to save the woman makes her a murderer. That's the absurd result. And their case still rests on one asserted premise, fetal personhood, never actually proven.