Abortion

"You covered everything except Soylent Green. Check it out, its right up your ally." Advocating liberty =/= dystopia. "Wrong, again without a woman being responsibly for the sanctity of life we wouldn't have a civilization to discuss." Again ambiguous collective fallacy - there is no construct "society" here that is valid, only individuals. "Sentence correction - prisons throughout this country are full of criminals that have violated the womb of a woman." That relates to abortion being made legal how exactly? The only thing it does it harm your case by the law recognising a woman as her own property and the ability of a trespasser in that property. :) "Fallacy - squashing a mosquito would not be illegal, but killing a human being born or unborn should be." Saying "fallacy" is a useless exercise unless you indicate what one - i.e. how the argument is faulty. All you have done is gone NUHUH! Saying "should be" is the resolution, not an argument. "Wrong, the definition of Homo sapien is a human being, and by your our volition a foetus is Homo sapien, thus a foetus is human being and given time and maturity will have rationally thoughts, if not executed first through a abortion." This a debate on philosophical grounds - Homo sapien is a biological scientific classification - it indicates nothing more than demarcation between species - human is a philosophical one, and specifically means "rational animal." Volition has nothing to do with whether an organism meets a classification criteria. Potentiality argument fails - as a sperm and embryo both have potentials for development into a human - thus under your reasoning making periods and masturbation illegal. "Correction - you consider the life she carries a symbiote. I consider it a unborn human being, that she is a caretaker of, and not to be viewed as a piece of property but as an unborn life." Unborn and symbiote are no exclusive definitions. It is residing on property that the mother has controlling right over - her body. "Incorrect - a parasitic, a worm or any other form of bacteria has no controlling rights over the human it may occupy. A human embryo conceived by two opposite sexed humans does have rights, no more or less then the mother of which conceived it." You still fail to give a basis for what rights are other than "life" - as such all life still has rights under your premise - equally you fail utterly in building a case for the singular rights of a foetus. "Correction of Fallacy - the daily microbial activity of our stomach acid destroying bacteria in our digestive system, cannot be compared to the growth of a human embryo in a mothers womb and its destruction through abortion." Simply making a statement is not an argument. Using your premises. 1. Destruction of life is murder 2. A microbe is alive 3. Killing a microbe is murder "Common Sense is the only basics of law, without it there is no foundation." In America the basis is the constitution - not common sense. Common sense is simply an appeal to popularity - if laws were based on this sole premise then popular vote would need to occur for the creation of each legal decision. Clearly that doesn't occur. Clearly you fail. "No matter what the current common perception. Example the Holocaust was considered acceptable by Nazi Germany but basic human common sense finally deemed it wrong, and a crime against society at the Nuremberg trails." Murder was established as punishable far prior to post WWII. It is not "common sense" that dictates reaction to murder is is based upon the rational premise that force should be void from social actions i.e. the right to life. "The Holocaust was always found fundamentally wrong, as is abortion." Fallacy - weak analogy, abortion =/= WWII genocide. "Sentence error - recognizing spelled wrong" Queen's English. It may be difficult for you to understand, however America is not the origin of the English language. ==