Abortion and the Biblical Sixth Commandment

For the sake of clarity, I would like to point out that "Pro" is arguing "pro-abortion" in light of the Sixth Commandment, and as "Con" I will be arguing "anti-abortion" in light of the Sixth Commandment. Mostly Bacteria? Pro's links were actually broken, so I couldn't read the sources he gave. This is usually an unfortunate side effect of debate. org that seriously needs to be attended to, as this has happened to me many times in the past. Now, the best translation of the Sixth Commandment is "thou shalt not murder. " This is killing in cold blood. Obviously sometimes in the Old Testament, killing was mandated by God, but it was always for a justifiable reason (e. g. divine judgement). Not murdering, as it is intended in Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17, is not killing in cold blood. In other words, you shall not take innocent human life, of which the unborn certainly qualify. From the spirit of the verses alone, it is obvious that this should be taken literally. Even if we are made up of mostly bacteria (which is dubious, to say the least), we know what humans are. Humans are living organisms. They grow, their cells work together for the good of the whole organism, they have DNA which marks them as human, etc. Even if we are made up of "mostly bacteria," I can still look at my friend and recognize him as human. There is no question what living entities I am not allowed to kill. I am not allowed to kill a human, someone made in God's own image (Genesis 1:26). Everything necessary for us to thrive (food and environment) is all that's necessary for the unborn to thrive. The unborn, like us, are living human organisms and therefore should be protected, just like we are. Who Should We Not Kill? Pro brings up dolphins, which are one of the most intelligent species on Earth (and a species that we should listen to when the Vogons come to demolish Earth to make way for a hyperspace bypass! ). This is actually a species that Peter Singer, noted pro-choice philosopher, would consider to be a person while the unborn and infants are not. One can assign a right to live to dolphins without considering them "persons" in the same way that humans are. I am opposed to killing dolphins, but for different reasons than I am opposed to killing humans. What makes humans valuable is their inherent capacity as rational, moral agents. This includes the unborn because while they do not possess the current capacity for it, they do possess the inherenty capacity for it. Given the natural course of development without have their lives prematurely cut short, they will develop the present capacity as rational, moral agents. This is why all humans deserve a right to life, because all humans have this inherent capacity. In order to kill any human requires a morally justifiable reason, this includes the unborn. But being human is a sufficient requirement, not a necessary one. This is why we would also grant an intelligent alien race a right to life. If the alien race also has an inherent capacity as rational, moral agents then it would be wrong to kill them. It would be wrong to abort an unborn Vulcan child just like it would be wrong to kill an unborn human child. Pro asserts that intelligence is what makes someone valuable, but as I have shown this proves too much. So what makes intelligence the deciding factor? Pro has yet to prove why this should be the qualification for us to assign value and the right to life. Contrary to what Pro says, this is entirely relevant to the postborn as well. Pro says that humans don't qualify for several months. So if intelligence is the deciding factor, then Pro must either admit that it is morally justifiable to kill a infants and toddlers due to their lack of intelligence, or reject intelligence as the deciding factor. This would also mean that more intelligent people could kill less intelligent people, since the more intelligent you are, the more valuable you are. This would allow the less intelligent to be killed or enslaved by the more intelligent. It seems altogether evident that under the Sixth Commandment, we should not kill any humans for a morally impermissible reason. Pro has not given sufficient reason to allow their death, even under the Sixth Commandment. I look forward to Pro's rebuttal.