Abortion should be federally illegal.

I would like to say that I am playing devil's advocate in this debate. My case will be based off of a 4 contention basis, filled with statistics, quotes, and personal beliefs. I will agree to all the definitions, minus that of abortion and life. Abortion will will be defined as: the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy. (Merriam Webster Dictionary) Life will be defined as: A person's age is calculated from birth date, not conception, and fetuses are not counted in the US Census. The majority opinion in Roe v. Wade states that "the word 'person,' as used in the Fourteenth Amendment [of the US Constitution], does not include the unborn. " (Pro-Con) Therefore life will be defined as a persons ability to survive outside of the womb. Now onto case-Opening Quote "The landmark abortion case Roe v. Wade, decided on Jan. 22, 1973 in favor of abortion rights, remains the law of the land. The 7-2 decision stated that the Constitution gives "a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy," and that "This right of privacy. .. is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. ""I stand in affirmation of today's resolution. Contention 1 is: Abortions ARE NOT AGAINST RELIGION Although the Catholic and Lutheran churches oppose abortion, more of their members believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases versus illegal in all or most cases (51% vs. 45%, Lutheran; 48% vs. 45%, Catholic). [1] Therefore the two major religions agaisnt the topic, actually are pro-choice. Therefore, we are not oppressing any religions, when we do this. The churches oppose, but not the people. The churches do not have vote, the people do. We should tailor to what the people wan't which is abortion. Contention 2 is: Reproduction Choices, empower women, because it is their body. The choice over when and whether to have children is central to a woman's independence and ability to determine her future. [2] Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote in the 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, "The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives. " [3] Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in her dissenting opinion in Gonzales v. Carhart (2007) that undue restrictions on abortion infringe upon "a woman's autonomy to determine her life's course, and thus to enjoy equal citizenship stature. " [4] CNN senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, JD, stated thatRoe v. Wade was "a landmark of what is, in the truest sense, women’s liberation. " [5]Contention 3 is: Fetuses are not alive. The two definitions, one provided by Pro-Con and My own interpretation, are not alive. For a human to have rights, it must be alive. Therefore, a fetus is not alive, because it can not survive outside of the womb. A fetus has no abiltiy to to anything, and it therefore nto alive. This is simple knowledge. My oponents own definition does not support his claims. The mother, responds to stimuli and adaptation to the environment, something a fetus can not do. Also, fetuses can not reproduce or grow in a stable manner, without the support of the mother. If you mother drinks, while you're in the womb, you will most likely come out "Damaged. " You can not fend for yourself while in the womb, which makes you not alive. Contention 4: Rape and Incest CasesIn the case of rape or incest, forcing a woman made pregnant by this violent act would cause further psychological harm to the victim. No one wants to relive the tragedy that is rape and incest cases, and forcing women, to give birth to the baby is likely to put the baby in a bad situation. It's like the story of the Ugly Duckling. The mother and father did not want said duckling, and therefore subjected it to harm. It was bullied in "school. " This same thing would happen to a real life baby, if he was born through rape and incest. Making abortions illegal would put these people throgh a tramatic exprience, which would only worsen their suffering. Now onto my opponents case:1. Already Proved this wrong with my counter definition which was froma supreme court case, and common knowledge. 2. Fetuses are not guilty, I agree. But, in cases of rape and incest the fetus is not wanted. The parents do not want the fetus, and they have a consitutional right to abort this baby. Under Rowe Vs Wade and other supreme court cases.3. At the outset, let me say that from a pro-choice point of view, the status of the fetus is a peripheral issue. Regardless of whether a fetus is a human being or has rights, women will have abortions anyway, even if it means breaking the law or risking their lives. Even women who believe that abortion is murder have chosen to get abortions, and will continue to do so [6]. Not only does the view of a pro choice actavist say that the status of the fetus is not important, Rowe Vs Wade says that the fetus is not the human and women have the right. [1] . http://religions.pewforum.org...;[2] Our Bodies Ourselves (OBOS, aka Boston Women's Health Book Collective), "Reproductive Choices," ourbodiesourselves. org (accessed Apr. 22, 2014)[3] . https://www.law.cornell.edu...;[4] . http://abortion.procon.org...;[5] . http://www.newyorker.com...;[6] . http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org...;