Most Abortion is Murder

One way to draw the line between "human life" and "reproductive cells", I suggest, is to draw it when the parents finalize the name of their offspring.Parents may decide a name for their child at conception, but they can't know the gender right away. So they will have to decide both female and male names, to be prepared for either case. You could finalize the name at conception by choosing a unisex name like Jordan or Taylor, but this would not allow the parents to choose the name they want, perhaps if they have a grandparent's name they wish to use. So not all parents can finalize the name right at conception. They have to weight 18 or so weeks to determine the gender. Up until those 18 weeks have expired, the fetus is nameless. If it is human life, it should be able to have a human name.And if it can't have a human name, then terminating it isn't murder.---If human life begins at conception, then menstruation is murderThis argument is quite simple. Fertilized eggs can be flushed out of the female body. That's a well known fact I don't think it's necessary to cite it (nor can I find a paper specifically about that because it's too basic of a fact). The heading speaks for itself. The human body itself doesn't think that every egg that gets fertilized deserves to grow into a fully developed human. I don't see why we should, or how it's even possible for us to hold every fertilized egg in regard as "human life", if it's just a waste by-product of reproduction.---Those are my two main expansions on the idea of human life. Below are some addendums:---Human life can be defined as something that has human consciousness. Fetuses don't have consciousness; I'll support that by asking anyone to recall their experience in the womb. Consciousness requires memory, and if there's no memory of an event then a human life didn't experience it. Forgetting happens though; people don't remember events after heavily intoxicating themselves, but during the event they can at least maintain some short term memory (they know where they are and what they are doing). If you ask them their name, they can probably tell you, so their long term memory must be working as well. If you are asleep, you still have human life in you because you have memory of before you went to sleep, and after you went to sleep. Anything upper limited and lower limited by memory of experience of events is considered to be an event in human life. Human life begins when you have your first memory, and ends at the point when going forward, you will no longer remember anything else.So at the very least, it's certain that human life begins or has begun at consciousness.---Fertilization is just another chemical reaction. If we consider sperm cells to be human life, then that means male ejaculation is abortion/murder. If we consider female egg cells to be human life, then menstruation is abortion/murder. Neither of these cells alone is a human life. And even when they are combined in a chemical reaction, menstruation can still toss them. Which would mean the body is a murderer, given definitions from round 1. You could argue that males could be told not to masturbate, but telling females not to menstruate is futile.The body performs many chemical reactions. Fertilization is just another one of those. If the body is not trying to protect the result of this chemical reaction, then it suggests we should not try to protect the result by calling it "human life".------RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS:"I draw it at conception. Con says that a baby is a wonderful and blessed thing once it is born - so I ask again, is it not equally as wonderful 30 seconds before it is born? How about an hour? A day? Where does Con draw the line?"At the point after which the name has been given to the child. My reasoning has been elaborated above."So, according to this reasoning then, is a fully developed adult more human than a 6 year old?"No. Rather than the idea of "more human", I prefer to say "human or non-human"; a binary answer rather than a continuum."Con manages to say, "I of course, being con, do not consider the early stages of a fetus to be human life" but they have provided no evidence to show why this might be true."Rather than use evidence to determine when human life begins, I will use biology and human behaviour, as elaborated above.---SUMMARYIf you call it the Just War Theory, to explain why killing soldiers is ok, then so be it. That really would be a topic fo another debte and probably a red herring in this one. I appreciate the rebuttal given in the anticipation of the event I may have wished to muddle through semantics. I suppose in this debate, morbid as it may be, we will have to exclude soldiers from the definition of "human life" to avoid contradiction. And if a fetus arises from rape, incest, etc. then aborting it isn't considered murder, nor is it not considered murder, in this debate. Just a technicality I suppose.My final statement for this round: Abortion of an unnamed fetus is not murder, nor is a natural process of the body.