Abortion

Thank you for instigating. I’d like to clarify for the record that I’m neither for nor against Abortion, I’m neutral on this issue and have mixed opinions about it. REFUTATIONS: My opponent begins his argument by comparing abortion to killing a child, making it murder. He also argues that refusing to give birth is murder. He questions the legality and says that when women get raped and decides to abort, they are committing a crime, and his statement to this is to just be cautious because it happens. Really? That’s too selfish. But anyway, let’s move to my counter contentions: Contention 1: Abortion is NOT murder I’ll begin this contention by defining abortion and murder: Abortion- is defined as the termination of pregnancy by the removal or expulsion from the uterus of a fetus or embryo before it is viable {1}. Murder-is the unlawful/intentional killing, with malice aforethought, of another human being {2}. To say abortion is murder, my opponent needs to show and prove that a) a fetus is a human being, and b) All abortions are the intentional and unlawful killing of a human being. But, there are lawful/legal abortions implemented by governments (abortion laws) {3}, especially in the US, so technically, this automatically negates b) (unless PRO has some counter?) Killing a child with malice and intent is illegal, since children have rights, unlike fetuses. Refusing to give birth is not abortion per se, but probably selfishness of the mother. But come on, think logically, she’ll give birth eventually. If PRO can’t show and prove it, then he won’t satisfy his main contention that abortion is murder. But if he does prove it next round, I will expand this premise and negate his contentions. Killing can be justified permissible in some cases: Referring to PRO’s scenario comparing killing a child and terminating a pregnancy, I believe that’s too shallow, if otherwise, must we consider the following scenarios illegal/unlawful too? - Trolley Problem (where you are in a moving trolley and there is a man tied to the tracks a few meters from you, you’re about to hit him, but there’s another way, but that way, you can see 5 people tied to the tracks. Now you have to choose between killing that person or killing 5 people). - Parasitic Twin Example (Where a surgeon sacrifices a weaker twin to save the other twin). - Self Defense (Protecting yourself from harm). - Defense of Others (Protecting others from harm), - Kill One, Save Many (If, for example, you had the chance to kill Hitler or some other greedy/corrupt/homicidal tyrant who’ll commit a massive genocide affecting millions in a moment, would you? Would you do it to save those ‘million’ people?) Contention 2: Right to choose, A person’s (particularly a woman’s) right to choose is valuable, a person’s right to do what he/she wants to his/her body is valuable. They have the right to decide on what to do with their body. When a woman becomes pregnant, there is a chance that she will be affected with complications (pregnancy diseases, risks, etc.) Examples include ectopic pregnancy (caused by STDs), heavy bleeding, negative reproductive health diseases, diabetes, premature pregnancy, etc. {4} One could argue that the woman’s life is more important than the fetus’, so if health risks are involved, the best way is to abort the fetus, if we don’t, the woman could die. We, as a society, should value that right, the right to save one’s life. Also, a study related to abortion showed that abortion stats are similar in countries where it is lawful and those where it isn’t, it suggested that illegalizing the procedure does little to deter females seeking the termination of pregnancy {5}. (Will explain further next round if challenged) I will expand these contentions further in the next round when contested. Good luck to you, PRO! CITATIONS: {1} http://en.wikipedia.org... {2} http://en.wikipedia.org... {3} http://en.wikipedia.org... {4} http://www.americanpregnancy.org... {5} http://www.nytimes.com...