Abortion: right or wrong.

Yaaaay! You accepted the challenge. First of all I apologize for any wording that might have offended you, I really didn't think to much about it. Second of all, please use more punctuation and capital letters; I got a migraine trying to read your arguments. Maybe that was a tactic, if so, bravo. Lastly, I'm glad you noticed the change in wording, your arguments forced me to reexamine my words and format them to better suit my argument. I don't think that the mere re- wording of my old case affected your arguments against it, I think my follow up explanation and argumentation did the trick. OK first point, murder. What I went to great lengths to explain was that, even if you don't want to call abortion "murder", it is still a detrimental and less preferable action. We can call it an embryo if that is the proper term; I'm not going to look it up. It does not matter what the definition of murder is or whether or nor an embryo is a full fledged human life. The center of my argument is that you have a being with a very good chance of becoming a human life. Once you abort, you have a being with no chance of becoming a human life. If you don't want to call it murder because there is no malice involved, fine. OK, with your point about only aborting embryos. We have both minimized our cases to the point that I think we should change the topic to "First term, contraceptive abortion: right or wrong." That way we both get what we want and we can finally move on with the debate. In that same paragraph you give this argument: "i am not saying abortion is right by any means all im saying is give woman the choice so that the child's life along with the parents lives are not destroyed why bring another life into the world if all its going to receive is neglect malnutrition and resentment from its parents to me that is saving the child's life." This is my rebuttal: 1) I hope your saying that abortion is right by any means, that is your side. Don't worry, I won't tax you on wording, I'll assume you didn't mean it. 2) Adoption is always an option. There are millions of parents wanting children. So the assumption that the child's life will be horrible cannot be made. You really fail to explain how the parents lives will be ruined, with or without adoption, so I really don't see an argument there. 3) The idea that you're saving the child's life by preventing it's life is a bold one. If your really do value choice, you'd value the child's right to decide if they'd rather life badly or not live at all. Personally, I can't image many domestic circumstances in which I'd kill myself. Your next argument: "first off it does not hurt the economy if anything it beefs it up because the people who are not left where they drop are those who can afford it the government does not pay for procedures and overly expensive medication most insurance companies don't even pay for that so i say its a good thing to help them because it may lead to a cure or new forms of medicine and it does help the economy and i believe the abortion of embryos does the same thing helps the economy and through stem cell research could save thousands of lives while keeping our population levels and a safe amount. if you just let the other people die then there is no money being pumped into new medical treatments and no new treatments will ever be discovered so i view the abortion of an embryo a much better solution than just leaving an injured man where he falls." My rebuttal: 1) I can't believe you're making the utilitarian calculus argument a main point. I have seen these voters, they will never vote either way on this argument. We're considering on how to most cost efficiently kill people! 2) I'm not saying abortion has any effect on the economy, I was simply trying to make my policy a better idea. 3) I still say that if we stopped any and all medical treatments for complex and fatal diseases, we'd save money and people would die. The only reason we do it is people would die. You see, though people pay for the treatments of these diseases, it costs money to make them, and many hospitals spend money to administer them. If all research and development towards unknown treatments were to be stopped, a huge amount of money would be saved. Here's the kicker, they have about the same chance of living as an embryo. 4) As far as abortion helping with stem cell research, stem cells are primarily drawn from unused eggs from artificial insemination, not embryos from abortions. As far as the equality arguments, just cut and paste my previous rebuttal against this. As you reiterate at the end, so will I. I am not opposed to choice either. I am pro- life, not anti- abortion, not anti- choice. I find the value of a human life so great, that even something with only a high potential of being one, is "sacred"(it's in quotation marks because I don't mean it in the religious sense, simply that it is really really important). This being said "embryo- killing" is a detrimental action (it is bad). If one didn't have to do it, one shouldn't. Now, as we are only addressing contraceptive abortion, I don't think that a 9 month period of discomfort followed by a day or so of pain is insufficient reason to stop a life from establishing itself on this earth. That is why abortion is wrong, that is why I should win. You have not presented sufficient negative impacts (that could not be avoided), that would justify the detrimental action of "embryo- killing". If we could leave abortion legal and only women that had been raped or would die from birthing would use it, I'd be fine with it. But the majority of women have contraceptive reasons to abort, and that is wrong. So basically where your standing in this round is that you need to come up with some major reason why it would be terrible if abortion was illegal. This impact must be unavoidable and worse than "embryo- killing". I would also like to add that, though I think you are doing a fine job with this debate, many people who vote on this site read the topic and vote. I am glad we get to debate, I really am enjoying it, but we probably won't find out who won, simply if the site is more for, or against abortion. Just warning you.