Abortion is Generally Immoral.

I would like to start by responding to his comments about legalization. This debate is on the morality surrounding abortion, not whether or not it should remain illegal (which is a topic for another debate). "Choice" is simply a euphemism used by the pro-choice side to mean "abortion. " The fact is that pro-lifers are not "anti-choice. " I, personally, believe that women should have all sorts of choices, such as the choice of whom to marry, where to go to school, what religion to follow, etc. However, some choices are wrong. If abortion is immoral and on par with murder, then women should not be allowed to legally make the choice of having an abortion (nor should men be legally able to make that choice), just as no one should have the choice to murder, rape, etc. With that out of the way, I will present my argument that abortion is generally immoral, then I will support my premises. P1: From fertilization, the preborn are biological members of humanity. P2: It is prima facie immoral to kill an innocent human being. P3: Abortion takes the life of an innocent human being. C: Therefore, abortion is generally immoral. P1: From fertilization, the preborn are biological members of humanity. Embryologists, who are the experts in the field, consistently agree that life begins at fertilization. For example, from the most-used textbook on embryology, the authors note: "Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a 'moment') is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte. " [1]On top of that, the more sophisticated pro-choice philosophers, like Judith Jarvis Thompson (who came up with the famous analogy of the violinist), and Peter Singer, accept the full humanity of the preborn. Peter Singer has noted, “It is possible to give ‘human being’ a precise meaning. We can use it as equivalent to ‘member of the species Homo sapiens’. Whether a being is a member of a given species is something that can be determined scientifically, by an examination of the nature of the chromosomes in the cells of living organisms. In this sense there is no doubt that from the first moments of its existence an embryo conceived from human sperm and eggs is a human being. ” [2]It's simply common sense. We know the preborn are alive because they grow. Non-living and dead things don't grow. They also exhibit other signs of life, including (but not limited to): cell division, respiration, and response to stimuli. The preborn have human DNA, and they are the product of human parents. Creatures reproduce after their own kind; dogs have dogs, cats have cats, and humans have humans. At no point in human development is a member of humanity a "non-human. "P2: It is prima facie immoral to kill an innocent human being. The preborn are innocent; in other words, they have committed no wrong. Certainly no crime worthy of being put to death. In fact, in the vast majority of cases they are there because of a consensual act between two people who, through that act, created a needy child and now bear a responsibility to care for that needy child. All humans have a right to life. The right to life is a categorical property. You either have it or you don't. It is not a property that comes in degrees. One human does not have a greater right to life than another. P3: Abortion takes the life of an innocent human being. Every abortion ends the life of a living human, one that has not done anything deserving of being killed. C: Therefore, abortion is generally immoral. Any action that takes the life of an innocent living human is immoral. I leave the exception open for women whose life is in immediate jeopardy because it is no longer a case of abortion but of triage. Two patients are in mortal danger and only one can be saved. The one with the greater chance of survival is the one that doctors will save, which is the mother. I look forward to Con's reply. [1] Ronan O'Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8. [2] Peter Singer, Practical Ethics, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 85-86.