Abortion should be illegal

This round was meant to be strictly for closing statements, however, my opponent has asked me two questions and she requires a response. So, I declare Rule (III D) to be null and void for this debate for the mutual interests of both parties. I will answer my opponent's questions first.1. " First, if abortion is murder does that make a miscarriage involuntary man slaughter?" (sic)Involuntary manslaughter is defined as: " the unlawful killing of another person without premeditation or so-called 'malice aforethought.' Involuntary manslaughter occurs when a death is caused by a violation of a non-felony." So, if no laws were broken, then a miscarriage is not involuntary manslaughter.2. " Second, Does your religion effect your views on abortion?" (sic)Affect? Yes. Influence? Yes. Define? No. I'm a Jesus Freak. If I decided to "quit on God," I would still be Pro-Life. And for the record, I don't have a "religion." I don't follow a denomination, theology, or leader. I don't need to stare at stained-glass and a steeple. I don't need to dress up to impress all the people. I don't need a priest. I don't need a pew. My religion is Jesus. He is my priest. He is my truth. He is my religion.Back to ground zero. "Note that children aren't physically connected to their mother and dont depend on them for nutrients and vitals."Wait a second... two thoughts... First, even after birth, the body of the mother is still connected to the baby through the umbilical cord. So, your logic states that it is OK to kill that baby since it is still getting nutrients and some essentials from the mother until it is cut. Congrats. Your logic means you support infanticide.Second, newborns around the world depend on their mothers for food and water. Whether it's from the mother's own body through breast feeding or by going to the store. Take this situation: Abby gives birth to a baby boy named Jake. Abby doesn't have much money for expensive formula, but she has enough money to cover the essentials for herself and her baby. She can buy herself food, she pays the rest, she buys the diapers. Life seems good. Until one day Jake dies and Abby is arrested. Why? Because she refused to breastfeed her child and he starved to death. She screams as she as pulled out of her house and by the front of the TV cameras: "The government can't tell me what I want to do with MY body!" Again, my opponent's logic, if it were sound, extends to outside the womb to born children. "Stem cells are vital to humans so getting research done is crucial to the medical field."Again, the logic here extends to outside the room if it were valid. Hitler had children killed to experiment with genetics. Must be fine then. The experiments saved lives after all... right? I mean, Hitler didn't know the Jewish babies were human, so he must have been right. One of his men once said "The Jews may have certain human attributes, but make no mistake, they are not human in the natural sense. They have neither the conscience, nor the development, to truly be human." Sound familiar?" 47,000 women die per year because they are forced to get unsafe abortions because of restrictions."My opponent's own source shows that the majority of those "unsafe abortions" take place in countries where any medical procedure is dangerous. Oh, and by the way, 13,000,000 abortions were carried out last year in China alone. A good deal of those were female. So, more than 7,000,000 girls were killed last year because of safe or unsafe abortion.And stop with the nonsense about abortion protecting women. By 1990, 23 years ago, there were 100,000,000 "missing" women in Africa and Asia because of Gendercide, specifically killing unborn babies because they are female."Having less children will reduce poverty. "If this is an OK reason to have an abortion, why don't we just kill the down and out of our society like China does? That reduces poverty! "Also, as stated earlier, abortion isn't killing."My opponent has pretty much been running in circles this entire time. She started off with: "It doesn't have any human like qualities. " I showed that it does. Then she went with " children aren't physically connected to their mother and dont depend on them for nutrients and vitals." I've shown that infants need mothers, or at least caregivers. She has not given foundation for what "human" is. She has not given foundation to her statement.My opponent has pretty much used circular reasoning this entire debate. Observe: "Abortion isn't killing because the fetus is not human. And the fetus isn't human because abortion is not killing!" That makes no sense. "Toddlers are already alive."My opponent has not given a reason why this idea of "alive" is different then an unborn baby. This has been the royal run around the whole time. The majority of her reasons that abortion is OK extends into the life of a born child. "I said earlier the tissue is part of her body. Its growing inside her and feeding off nutrients."Remember my story of Abby? Yeah, that child needed her nutrients too. And don't forget the umbilical cord.OK, this is the end of my arguments. I'd like to summarize.1. My opponent has given no set in stone reason that an unborn child is not human.2. My opponent's arguments extend into a born child's life.3. Genetically and physically, an unborn child is human. It is a developing human. Just like a teenager. I'm not quite fully developed. Guess that means you can abort me now.To finish off, I'd like to address something. I've drummed up some controversy with my abortion photos. Why did I put them there? William Wilberforce once said: Thank you and goodnight. I hope I have done something to curb the American Holocaust.