Abortion

Argument two rebuttal: My opponent stresses that a foetus has a heart and a brain, though I will point out that the difference between a human child is too substantial overlook when determining whether a foetus is a human being or not. I shall use this example from a previous debate of mine to demonstrate. Take some bread being prepared by a baker, the bread is dough before it becomes bread therefore it is not bread. The dough is only potential bread, and it will not become bread until it has risen inside the oven. The dough is not bread, only potential. The same principle applies for the foetus, it is only potential human. It is not yet a human until it has been born. I will finish this with another excerpt from the previous debate. Mary Ann Warren, a philosopher, argues that in order to be considered a person, a being should have the following characteristics: 1. A developed capacity for reasoning- Which a foetus does not posses. 2. Self awareness- Which a foetus does not posses. They are unaware of their surroundings and their existence until they are born. 3.Consciousness and ability to feel pain- A foetus can feel pain at 29 weeks, they do not posses a consciousness. 4. Self motivated activity- A foetus is not properly aware of it's movements, they are not self motivated 5. Capacity to communicate messages of an indefinite variety of types- A foetus cannot communicate, people sometimes misinterpret kicks or movement with communication but the foetus is not aware of an outside world, or it's mother. To prevent the debate from straying off topic I will present my final arguments and conclusion. The right to abortion is vital to gender equality: If a woman is denied to the right to have an abortion she is not only forced to continue the pregnancy to birth but also expected by society to support and look after the resulting child for many years to come (unless she can get someone else to do so). Such as social services. Lack of abortion would make women conform to the stereotypical assumption of a mother. Something that they may not want to adhere to. Another aspect of this is that women would never be able to be equal to men if they were denied the right to not be pregnant. Men do not get pregnant and are not restricted in the same way. Women who were raped do not need to carry the rapists child: A woman who was raped would not want to carry or raise the rapists child. I refer back to the my example from round one. If a person has a parasite living inside them would want to remove it. It was the woman's body to begin with, and a sub human organism should not have a say in whether it should remain inside the woman's body. The conception was forced so should the victim be forced to carry a child that if born, would receive no love from it's mother, or be sent into the care system from an early age. A life that is far from enjoyable for a child. Backstreet abortions would be rife: If abortion was made illegal people would still want abortions. Alcohol was made illegal during the 1920s, yet people still went to speakeasy's and purchased illegal alcohol. Marijuana is illegal, yet people still smoke it and can purchase it. Back street abortion clinics would deal with patients and would be more than likely to harm the mother. Banning abortion would not stop it, it would however be more dangerous than keeping it legal. Conclusion: Women need free access to abortion in order to achieve full political, social, and economic equality with men, women also need the right to abortion in order to have the same freedoms as men. Lastly women need the right to abortion to have full rights over their own bodies (including the right to decide whether or not to carry a foetus to birth) - without this right they do not have the same moral status as men, nor do they have freedom of choice or right over their own body. Sources: http://www.bbc.co.uk... http://www.debate.org...