Abortion should be made illegal in the United States.

My opponent offers multiple definitions of murder, but I offer a more reliable definition from Cornell Law, rather than an Internet dictionary. It states that "At common law, murder was defined as killing another human being with malice aforethought. " One could also use the Pennsylvania Method, which is the overall term for murder that is divided into various degrees (first, second, and third). Title 18 U. S. Code 1111 defines first degree murder as such: "Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Every murder perpetrated by poison, lying in wait, or any other kind of willful, deliberate, malicious, and premeditated killing; or committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, any arson, escape, murder, kidnapping, treason, espionage, sabotage, aggravated sexual abuse or sexual abuse, child abuse, burglary, or robbery; or perpetrated as part of a pattern or practice of assault or torture against a child or children; or perpetrated from a premeditated design unlawfully and maliciously to effect the death of any human being other than him who is killed, is murder in the first degree. " Second degree murder is defined as "An unpremeditated killing, resulting from an assault in which death of the victim was a distinct possibility. Second degree murder is different from first degree murder, which is a premeditated, intentional killing; or results from a vicious crime such as arson, rape, or armed robbery. "As one can see, abortion is not murder under the common law because it does not come from malicious or evil aforethought. It is also not murder under the Pennsylvania Method, as it again does not involve malicious thoughts and is not unpremeditated. My opponent may try and make the argument that abortion is child abuse, but this is simply not the case. In fact, the National Institute of Health discusses the most common motives for mothers to have an abortion. They state, "The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%). " All of these reasons are for the best interest of the child. Without proper education, work, ability to care for dependents, lack of money, or inability to care for the child on their own, these mothers did not have the ability or circumstances to care for the child. While adoption may be an option, when a woman is raped or molested and resulted in pregnancy, carrying your murderer's child and giving it away can be a lifetime traumatic reminder of the abuse. So, while abortions are intended and premeditated, they are not done out of malicious motives and thus do not fall under the category of murder. Furthermore, it is also not child abuse because, as statistics prove, it is done out of selflessness for the good of the child. My opponent continually provides evidence that fetuses are living. I am not disagreeing, nor have I disagreed with it at all in this entire debate. He spent a majority of his second rebuttal proving the life of a zygote, however he only uses a quote from Locke to support his idea that a fetus is human. However, if we were to remove an organ from you (like that heart) and place it in the right scientific environment (a fetus is in the proper enovironment of the womb), it would display enough of my opponents requirements of life to qualify as life. However, is a heart a person? No. It may be a piece of a person, it might have the same DNA as a person, it may be "alive", but a heart is not an entire person and does not deserve human rights. Thus, while Locke's quote is genius, it falls when used as a defense for my opponent. In conclusion, abortion is not murder on a logical scale (it is done with consent of the mother, who has full responsibility and is the decision maker of the child. My earlier argument described a comparison to that of a person in a vegetative state and their family) or on a lawful scale, as it does not fall under any law definition of murder. Secondly, while a fetus may be alive, it is not a human, much like while a heart separated from a body is alive but not human. Clearly you must negate this resolution. As I have proven throughout this debate, abortion is not murder and is done for the good of the child. Even if one does not agree, the fetus cannot consent, so it is the mother's responsibility to choose the right decision regardless of your political or religious beliefs. While aborting a fetus is never the easiest or wanted choice, many mother's find that this is the best option for their child and themselves, thus is should remain legal. Sources:. https://www.law.cornell.edu...https://www.law.cornell.edu...https://aspe.hhs.gov...;I