Abortion

AcceptanceI accept. I'd like to thank my opponent for creating this debate. I will be defending the view that abortion is wrong. I will begin by presenting a deductive logical argument against abortion before addressing my opponent's argument(s). I look forward to a good discussion!Argument Against AbortionPremise 1: Murder is wrongPremise 2: The killing of an innocent human is murderPremise 3: A fetus is an innocent humanConclusion: The killing of a fetus is wrongIn order to reject the conclusion that "the killing of a fetus is wrong", my opponent must falsify at least one of the argument's premises. Until my opponent is able to accomplish this, the conclusion that "the killing of a fetus is wrong" stands.As the first two premises are fairly self-explanatory and uncontroversial, I will dedicate the majority of my time to defending the third premise, which states that "a fetus is an innocent human". The word fetus is a description of a particular human developmental stage. Such words commonly used to describe various stages of human life: fetus, infant, toddler, child, adolescent, adult, etc. It would be absurd to say something along the lines of, "that's not a human being, that's a toddler!" It's evident that toddlers are of the species homo sapien. In the very same way, it is evident that fetuses inside of a homo sapien womb are homo sapien fetuses. It'd be very strange indeed if a homo sapien male and a homo sapien female mated to produce offspring of some other species. So, I think it's as clear as night and day that a fetus is a human, regardless of developmental stage, geographic location, etc. But if it's true that a fetus is a human (an innocent one), then it follows from the deductive argument that the killing of a fetus (abortion) is wrong. RebuttalSex isn"t used as just a reproductive process, it"s a way to express love, affection, and loyalty to your significant other.This is irrelevant. The debate topic is abortion, not the purpose(s) of sex."Sometimes a baby is accidentally conceived, in which a woman will have to decide what to do. If abortion is made illegal, then it will be taking away an option."This is true, but not much of an issue. The woman has other options, including keeping the child and raising the child herself or putting the child up for adoption. You seem to be arguing that the slaughter of an innocent human is justifiable on the basis that the mother in question isn't satisfied with the multiple options already available to her; I find this reasoning to be both blatantly irrational as well as morally reprehensible. "Women should have as much freedom on this topic as they can, as pregnancy is a powerful event in a woman"s life."It's a powerful event in the life of the woman's child as well. Why is the women's "right" of freedom to kill valued above an equal human's (albeit in a different developmental stage) right to life? Using that logic, why can't a woman kill her infant, or toddler? On my opponent's view, it seems that telling a woman she can't murder her infant or toddler is wrong as it deprives her of her "right" to freedom.Abortion doesn"t have to be the only option, adoption or raising the child are still safe paths to go down.I'm glad to see that my opponent and I agree that adoption and raising the child are both viable options."But abortion should be made a possibility for those who choose it."Again, I don't see why my opponent privileges the women's "right" to kill above another human's right to live. Moreover, using this very same logic, women ought to have the "right" to kill their offspring at any age. SummaryThrough a deductive logical argument, I have shown that abortion is wrong. I await my opponent's response to this argument. Thus far, my opponent has used faulty reasoning which I have adequately refuted. As it stands, it seems to me that abortion is the killing of an innocent human and as such is wrong.Thank you.Sourceshttp://www.tandfonline.com...http://www.merriam-webster.com...http://www.plannedparenthood.org...