GTP Mass Debating Contest- Heat 2

[Blake]

Can we use QUOTE tags in our rebuttle? If so, do they count towards our 200 word limit?

 

[Touring Mars]

Can we use QUOTE tags in our rebuttle? If so, do they count towards our 200 word limit?

I hope so, because it would be very difficult to type a rebuttal to specific points in the other team's argument without doing so...

 

[Danny]

Can we use QUOTE tags in our rebuttle? If so, do they count towards our 200 word limit?

Quotes are fine, and don't count towards the 200 words.

 

[Blake]

Wonderful, Team E is ready to submit, then.

 

[Swift]

Team D Rebuttle​

Team E — Anti-abortion​

Unborn babies should be and are currently afforded the same human rights status as a newly born baby – we argue that the point at which a developing human life may no longer be terminated legally is arbitrary, and is not based on any firm criteria or evidence.

How can the fetus have rights if it has not yet become a member of society? It has no official ID of any form, no official documentation of it being accepted as a citizen. We do not give animals rights because they are not considered citizens. We do not give illegal aliens rights because they are not citizens, so why should we give an unborn fetus rights? It has no proof of citizenship, and therefore should not be given any rights whatsoever. If we do not give illegal aliens rights due to their lack of official documentation, then an unborn fetus without documentation of citizenship should not be given rights. A fetus, during it's time in the womb, does not have any proof of citizenship, and therefore is not protected by law.

We contest that the rights of the pregnant woman should not take precedence over the right of the child – the fundamental point being that each human life has an equal right to exist. Women can exercise a very large degree of control regarding their choice of whether or not to become pregnant, whilst the rights of the child cannot be employed by the child itself; therefore they need to be protected by the law.

Furthermore, human rights can only be issued in such a way that they do not conflict with another person's rights. Granting a fetus, which has no legal status in society, the rights of a human will conflict with the mother's right to her own body. Any rights granted to the fetus, which may limit the mother's free choice, then violates her own rights.

 

[Touring Mars]

Team E - Rebuttal
​

A fetus is the property of the mother. This means she gets to decide whether it becomes a human being with rights that is protected by law.

The egg was the property of the mother - the sperm the property of the father. The fertilised egg is, at the very least, property of both – it’s also a new, separate living entity that is its own property. Therefore, decisions based on property rights shouldn't be exclusively the mother's to make.

The rights of a woman over her body cannot be argued and as the fetus must be a part of her body in order to live its fate falls under her personal rights until a time in which it becomes its own entity that does not require a connection with the mother.

The foetus’ physical connection with the mother is irrelevant since it’s already regarded as a separate entity protectable by law long before that connection is cut. The mother’s personal rights do not permit or justify behaviour that jeopardises the life of the baby.

A mother has the right to perform a surgery in order to extract the part of her body which currently presents a risk to her health.

When that ‘troubled part’ of the body is another living entity with an equal right to exist, it is not a right of the mother to remove it. If it was, then by the same logic the foetus should also have the right to be given the best possible chance to survive.

Furthermore the mother's life will be severely upset after birth and she may take this into account. This form of post-natal risk is a threat to the mother and she has the right to remove a part of her body that can set her life into emotional and/or physical distress. A fetus creates an emotional, physical, and mental threat to the mother while it’s being carried and after its birth. The mother has the right to remove the troubled part of her body that is causing the threat.

Aside from avoiding pregnancy in the first place, emotional stress relating to pregnancy can be alleviated by many ways besides abortion. Abortion itself causes severe stress. Women can exercise many options whereas the unborn child has no means to address the threat to its own life.

 

[Danny]

Judges, PM me your decision and reasons please.

 

[Swift]

And all the cards are on the table. Judges! Do yo' Thang!

Next topic I hope to get something not done to death like abortion. Maybe immigration issues or National security. Maybe even affirmative action or welfare

 

[Wenders]

Will be reading the rebuttals and making my decision when I get home from work tonight.

 

[Evolution.]

done to death like abortion

I found that mildly disturbing and extremely ironic.

 

[a6m5]

I have sent in my decision. 👍

 

[Blake]

I’ve sent the money, a6m5. Should be there within 48 hours.

 

[a6m5]

I’ve sent the money, a6m5. Should be there within 48 hours.

Thank you. Swift, you better move your butt. Fast.

 

[Blake]

No, it’s too late for them. I used FedEx. Nothing can beat FedEx. Not even Superman.

 

[Blake]

And all the cards are on the table. Judges! Do yo' Thang!

Next topic I hope to get something not done to death like abortion. Maybe immigration issues or National security. Maybe even affirmative action or welfare

I don’t know if American centred topics are a good thing. This is an international forum and topics based around a particular nations policies would skew the results pretty badly.

 

[Wenders]

my decision has been sent in.

 

[dougiemeats]

I'll be sending my decision tonight.

 

[Swift]

I don’t know if American centred topics are a good thing. This is an international forum and topics based around a particular nations policies would skew the results pretty badly.

The only american topic was AA. Many other countries have trouble with the other issues I listed.

 

[Danny]

My Decision: Team E

Both teams' initial arguments were strong and presented well. It would have been very difficult to choose a clear winner had the initial argument been the sole component in which to base my decision on. Team E, however, provided a stronger rebuttal. They covered the opposing side's arguments and provided strong counter-points against them. Team D's rebuttal also brought up strong points against Team E's initial argument, but didn't counter them as effectively. For example; their comparison with a fetus and an illegal alien is not very clear, since it is still against the law to terminate an illegal alien in the same manner as a fetus. Despite this, I was very impressed at their argument about conflicts between people's rights.

Overall, both teams did an excellent job arguing their side of this controversial issue. Team E was more effective in delivering their argument and providing their counter-argument. My decision goes to Team E.

This topic has been a little hard as I do have quite strong personal beliefs on and have had to put them aside so as not to make a biased decision.

My point goes to team E. I feel they have put together a better argument in terms of structure and content.

Team E looked good from the beginning. They made some good points and a strong case for the life of fetuses. I did see a hole or two in their argument, but they were not successfully countered in the Team-D's rebuttal.

Team D tried to make a point of how dangerous giving birth is. Also how mentally and physically stressful it can be for the mother. But their comparison of fetus to a cancer-like risk that must be surgically removed just didn't do it for me. IMO, they should have attacked the Team E's claim on how human rights must be protected in all stages of its' development. That right there could've been that big comeback win, but their rebuttal consisted mostly of animals' and illegal aliens' rights(or lack there of), which also didn't do it for me.

My vote is for the Team E.

As many GTPrs know, I’m very much pro-abortion. However, the debate was, in my mind, definitely won by Team E. Both initial arguments were strong, although I wonder why Team D never mentioned the issue of forcible rape (which would have been difficult for Team E to rebuke). Also, while the arguments that Team D did concentrate on were strong, they were presented in a non-standard way that was hard to follow (for example, they delved right in instead of having a true introduction).

Team E also won out on the rebuttles. They made a very solid rebuttle, although they should have elaborated on women’s “options”. Team D’s rebuttle had some very sketchy logic in the first point of their rebuttle – they seemed to contend that an unborn fetus has the same rights (or lack of) as an illegal alien. However, this discussion is about abortion – terminating life. Just because somebody is an illegal alien doesn’t mean that they can be killed. Thus, the analogy falls apart. Also, legal aliens are also not citizens, but have the same right to life as illegal aliens, so again the analogy falls apart. Team D should have concentrated on what physiological aspects defines whether something has rights – the right to life has absolutely nothing to do with citizenship. Their second point in the rebuttal was excellent though.

So, Team E wins, primarily because they had no logical fallacies and presented their arguments in a clear fashion. Congrats to both teams.👍

Winners- Team E

 

[kennythebomb]

Congrats Team E!

 

[Touring Mars]

Nice one - good job, guys, especially considering that we all firmly don't buy our own argument or rebuttal! This was a sobering experience...

Props to Team D for a good argument that gave us something to get our teeth into 👍 And props to the judges for being able to remain objective, despite any personal views on the subject matter

Does this mean we are proper BS-er's now, or just a bunch of cunning linguists?

 

[Danny]

How about Acting Managing Comitee Of Correct English Language Uses?

 

[FoolKiller]

Props to Team D for a good argument that gave us something to get our teeth into 👍 And props to the judges for being able to remain objective, despite any personal views on the subject matter

Congrats guys.

I'm going to take a nap, someone wake me up the next time I have a round.

 

[Dave A]

Congrats guy's.

 

[Swift]

Oh well. I really hated being on that side of the argument anyway.

Congrats to Team E.

 

[Blake]

First of all, good job to the judges. It’s good that you all put that much effort into the explanations – it will help us all improve in the future.

Indeed, good job to Team D, you definatly gave us some stuff to think about after your initial argument. 👍

The word limit was … well … interesting. Definatly made it difficult to put forward a structured argument.

 

[a6m5]

The word limit was … well … interesting. Definatly made it difficult to put forward a structured argument.

Sometimes, you are able to beat a better opponent by adapting to certain rules better. In mass-debate, the big one I think is the word limit. My impression of the Team E's arguments were that they didn't seem hampered by the word limit. I thought they adjusted very well.

Good job to both teams, and good luck on your next debate. 👍

 

[Danoff]

...speaking of which, when is our fearless leader going to call the next debate?

 

[Duke]

Hopefully not any time soon, because I'm out of town until Wednesday.

 

[Swift]

Hopefully not any time soon, because I'm out of town until Wednesday.

That's fine, the debate doesn't start until Thursday