Abortion as birth control should be illegal.

throwing confidentiality right out the window: "If he raped his daughter, I couldn't see too many people being concerned with his confidentiality. If she is lying, she should go to jail (or jeuvie)."Her confidentiality! One of the key issues to Roe v Wade, and the 14th Constitutional Amendment; which the reason to reject has been refuted (the drop in birth rates, which actually happened prior to it).The amount of courage it would take for one of these girls to report her father, is immeasurable. Demanding she either birth her father's (or other relatives) child, or attempt to send someone she loves (due to Stockholm syndrome [11]) to prison and face everyone knowing what happened (school bullying etc), is a borderline evil choice. Of course she might go a third option and seek an underground abortion, "but should we feel bad for people who break the law?" I'm guessing according to pro the answer is no, and that anything which goes wrong is acceptable collateral damage because she's a lawbreaking criminal. I highly disagree with this sentiment.Proving that she is lying is pretty hard: "That's why we have polygraphs"It's a subjective test easily influenced by emotions, proven too unreliable to be used in court, and you wish to send people to prison and force them to bare children if they fail it? Granted in prison they don't have to go bankrupt over it, but that is another very poor solution to the social problems in question."Giving them a silent abortion and sending them on their way isn't going to help rape victims get justice or feel better in the end."Rape is the one crime to which the victim is placed on trail, sometimes more so than the accused (comparing her to Satan, is acceptable behavior). This proposal would likely backfire on this proposed benefit of more convictions, as women receiving an abortion for rape would have to live in fear of failing their trail; thus encouraging them to either get an underground abortion or suck it up and give birth to the rapists offspring. I hope we can both agree those are both horrible options, and a victim should never be placed in a position to have to consider such.I believe the above serves very effectively to refute the "Case1" and "Case2" false dilemma fallacy."You seem to be focusing mostly on problems with our legal system now."Yes. We both live in the United States, therefore I assumed this debate is over the United States today, not some utopia with universal health care etceteria.While I never called abortion an "easy out," a woman not needing the permission of men to make medical decisions that often affect her for the rest of her life, is an "awesome right" they have in western society. Should medical advances allow men to carry the children for them, which would actually satisfy the Roe v Wade ruling in regards to when it's too late to have an abortion (sustainability even if by artificial means), than this issue would be worth revisiting."it actually blinds them to their rights to enjoy parenthood and live comfortably like the rich people who can have as many kids as they want and not worry about it."Your arguments have begun to directly contradict themselves, for example: "many would argue that you should not have a child if you can't afford one." "Minorities and young women are far more likely to have abortions, as are the poor" I believe I have already countered with the cost of merely birthing a child ("$12,638.31") being more than enough to bankrupt someone, forcing that cost upon them would only maintain whomever is in the lower class staying there."There is also a choice long before the point of considering an abortion, of whether to have sex, with whom, and how."Seriously? You point out that people "should not have a child if you can't afford one," and then imply if they don't have that money they shouldn't have sex either? Or is this a plea for them to restrict themselves to same sex sex? ... If relying with the "how," keep in mind that abstinence only programs have failed badly, yet are still inflicted upon youths; those programs as their name implies, excludes the teaching such things as how to use a condom [12].Reminder:As things stand right now...My sources have gone unchallenged, pro's have been refuted. However some of my conduct is questionable.The suggested changes seem to apply to a utopia, whereas attempting to enforce them risks a dystopia of Victim Blaming (subjectively rejecting my "unenforceable" motion, as such a society as that, really could enforce it).In my opinion there has yet to be a clear reason to reject either Roe V Wade or the 14th Constitutional Amendment.Sources:[11] http://counsellingresource.com...[12] http://rhrealitycheck.org...