Abortion is generally immoral.

Thanks for the response. REFUTATIONS "Making abortion illegal is the same as dictating ones future, because that's exactly what happens with an unplanned child." This debate is about whether or not abortion is immoral, not if it should be legal or not."I will begin my rebuttal, you state that a fetus is a living organism. True. But a fetus does not exist mentally. It is merely a fertilized egg. When a child is born however, any injuries or attempts at harm can be considered criminal because it has breathed, it can make sounds, it can somewhat think." However, I have already proved it his human, and living. Though it depends on the mother, doing any damage to it would be the same as you were to do to a 3 year old boy because they are both living, and human. "Most People go through birth control because they can't support a child. This is shows wisdom and initiative towards caring as a mother. If she willy nilly has children, or is denied an abortion because it is illegal, she will not be ready financially, therefore the baby will not be cared for properly, showing how inconsiderate pro-lifers are of the child." Once again, this debate is about morality, not legality. When a mother goes on birth-control, such is fair. But just because it doesn't work doesn't mean you should kill an innocent human for it. That is immoral, meaning unjust, or wrong."This is actually, for the same reasons I stated above, why woman should abort. They are acknowledging they could not support a family and they are taking the initiative by removing the fetus, not a human being." I have already proved a fetus is human. In fact, in your later arguments you even admitted it is human. So anyway, if she can't support it why kill it? This is wrong. Put it up for adopting if you can't care for it. It is immoral to kill it, because it is innocent. If you cannot care for it, it is better to give it to a family that can rather than kill it."You have no idea to the thoughts of a mother going through an trauma like an unexpected pregnancy, unless of course you have experienced one, then I would be clueless as to why you would take the chances of raising an unexpected child." How does this counter my argument? Since it didn't, I consider it an argument dropped. Sure, I have no experiance, considering I am a man. But even if a mother doesn't want to be pregnant, it doesn't mean she should kill an innocent human. Imagine if your mother no longer wanted you, so instead she just straight up killed you. Is this fair and moral? Absolutely not. The exact same thing applies to abortion. The mother does not want the baby, so she straight up kills it. This is immoral, especially since the baby is innocent thus far."Define perfect health. And another thing. Pre-natal scanning determines the look of said fetus, it cannot diversify birth or mental defects, therefore making this point completely invalid." Perfect health was an exageration, I meant at least average health. And my arguments are correct, it is possible to estimate the defects a child may recieve, however only in possibility. They are incapable of proving 100% that the baby will have a defect. Nevertheless, if the baby does have a defect, it does not allow you to kill it just because it doesn't have average health. This is immoral."This has to be the most ludicrous thing I've read in an abortion debate. I'm appalled you said "Just because you got raped does not mean you can kill the child". How seriously do you think about rape? Do think a woman should have a child from a man she has no connection to? Every time she looks at the child, she will be reminded the wrongs done to her, trauma like that's drives good people to suicide. Her family would want the baby aborted, they want a grandchild who's father they know. You insinuate that when a woman aborts a child conceived through rape, its greedy. I find that absolutely appalling. Reconsider what you said here, I'm lost for words." You find it appauling, but it is realistic. You need to face the facts. If a woman get's raped, she must care for the baby. It is unfair to kill it. Just because she will experiance trauma, doesn't mean you can just go on out and kill a child! Furthermore, trauma is only temporary, regardless if there is a totem to help the person remember the occurance. So if you get raped, and you abort a baby, you are killing a child so you no longer feel pain that is only temporary. This is highly immoral. You say going against this is appauling, however as I have just explained, being in favour of it is much more appauling. Abortion due to rape = Killing an innocent being to end a temporary problem."I don't think people with mental disorders kill for pleasure, especially something inside of them that has no physical appearance to yourself. Of course, there are some mental disorders that cause that, but even then I'm sure they would be noticeable." Once again, this doesn't prove anything, nor counters my argument, thus another argument dropped. It was inccorect for you not to make a platform. In this debate, you need to prove that abortion is moral. All you did was counter my points, and dropped half of them. Furthermore, countering them had not relation whatsoever to abortion being moral. I have countered your counter arguments, and proved abortion is immoral. You on the other hand proved nothing thus far. You have no explantion to which why aboriton is moral in most cases. I proved in most cases, maybe even all cases abortion is wrong. I have no need to create any further argument. My opponent dropped most of my cases, and they didn't create any of their own. Furtermore, they didn't prove abortion is moral. Also, I countered their counter arguments, and renedered them all false.