Abortion

Good luck to both of us. As my opponent has already written his opening arguments, and as there are only 2 rounds, I shall write my own in Round 1. First argument - Lack of Prevention:The banning of various acts and products only creates more demand for such on the black market, being the illegal purchasing or soliciting of these products and services. This is evident in the sale of drugs, arms, and in historical cases, abortion procedures. Studies show that most abortions come from the poor, as they are least equipped to handle their children, as well as having a higher rate of being raped in their low income neighborhoods. Additionally, the Brookings Institute did a study on abortion, and they concluded that "There are large and widening gaps in rates of unintended childbearing between Americans on different rungs of the income ladder. A poor woman is more than five times as likely as an affluent woman to have an unintended birth. Since unintended childbearing is associated with higher rates of poverty, less family stability, and worse outcomes for children, these gaps further entrench inequality. Closing gaps in unintended childbearing is therefore important for greater equality and opportunity. " [1]This is quite evident as to why there is a desire for abortion, and this is due to the fact that banning abortion doesn't ban abortive procedures, rather banning the state allowance of these abortive procedures. Therefore, it's much better to allow for these women to operate under safe conditions, rather than making silly choices that would bear consequences easily replaced with a legal system for abortion. In addition to these findings, the data concluded that "here is no 'sex gap' by income. By contrast, lower-income individuals typically use contraception less frequently, and less successfully, than those with higher incomes. "[1] This means that lower income individuals happen to use contraceptives less often than higher income individuals, which evidently leads to higher cases of unwanted pregnancy. The issue that arises from such is the fact that lower income individuals make up the most amount of people that receive federal funding through welfare programs, meaning their rapid child bearing will not only have consequences on their own finances and ability to improve but also on the finances of the state, as welfare costs increase with the increase in childbearing. Second Argument - Murder:Federally, the act of murder is definied as "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. " [2]This means that so long as the dead specimen in question is not considered a human, it legally is not murder. Scientists conclude that fetuses are not born with the capacity to be defined as a human, therefore the termination of a fetus is not a murder, as it is not a human being. Sources:[1]. http://www.brookings.edu...[2]https://www.law.cornell.edu...