Abortion should be illegal.

1. Zygotes are microscopic eukaryote cells, and have not even begun to or just started to grow.They have merely just been fertilized.This is true, but there is significant scientific backing to prove that these microscopic eukaryotes are indeed human life.2. So you say that it's not the woman's right to end a human life, yet you say that it's ok to kill it if she does not want it?A woman is most definitely not allowed to go out and kill somebody, but it is her given right to abort a non-self-sufficient fetus (before 27-28 weeks) if she does not want said fetus. If you had a disease, and you had to have a machine or else you would die, would you still be viable for life, just because you're not in the womb and have been educated and fully developed?I can only assume you're describing a persistent vegetative state, and in that case, that person's viability for life is not as great as other people's. Every person on earth is not equal in terms of the viability of life, for example, if you are hooked up to a machine that kept you alive you would not be viable without it such as a fetus wouldn't be viable without the support of its mother.Why would it be our fault that the woman doesn't have a healthy way to perform the procedure?Because if this issue were to ever pop up on a ballot, I'm sure you would vote in favor of a prohibition on abortion, hence making it your (and everyone else that voted alongside you) fault that the woman does not have a safe, sterile, and professional environment to receive the procedure.Don't have it, instead, have the child, and put he/she up for adoptionhttps://www.theguardian.com...The adoption system in America is essentially broken, and adoption is a slowly worsening issue, and with an outlaw on abortion, the problem would only exacerbate itself even further. It is obviously a HORRIBLE thing to happen to a woman, and the person responsible should be hunted down, castrated and/or killed.I would say that supporting the death penalty for rapists is the antithesis of pro-life.However, if the woman was impregnated to due this, the child has rights. The child deserves to be born.The fetus doesn't "deserve" anything, the fetus isn't even aware that it is alive, let alone be aware if it were being aborted.6.You're correct, it is a woman's right to have sex.It's also a woman's responsibility to be careful.I am not oppressing a woman's right to have sex,I am merely asking a question. Why? Why would a woman(who does not want to have a child),have sex? Again, they are allowed to have sex, doesn't mean they should unless they want a child.If a woman has sex and gets pregnant, that's on her.That statement supports forced abstinence for women who don't want children but have sex, which oppresses their natural born rights to have intercourse whenever and with whoever they please.If:A) It is a woman's right to have sexB) A woman shouldn't have sex unless they want childrenThen:You effective oppress women who have no desire for children but a desire for sex.Also, you ask why would a woman who didn't want children have sex? Well, that's a simple question, human beings are one of the only species that have sex for pleasure and not reproduction, alongside Pigs, (arguably) Dolphins, and a few species of Primate.8. Never said that every country is worse off than the united states, just said that we are in a better financial situation(besides the trillions of dollars in debt we are) than them.Switzerland has been nominated as a more competitive economy than America multiple times.