Abortion

'Say the mother had an abortion at week three. There is an extremely high chance that even if you wanted to, you couldn't keep that baby alive at three weeks.' There is a simple way to keep it alive, it's called having it live in the womb. The argument isn't that it will survive after abortion (I don't expect it to survive after abortion), the argument is the validity of the fetus. You claim the low chances of survival in under-developed fetus' is a reason why it's ok to abort, yet you ignored my counter argument where I mentioned the seriously disabled. 'First, I don't want to bring grammar into this but,...' Well that's obviously untrue, as you just brought it up. Unlike you, I don't care about grammar, unless it is ineligible. By pedantically mentioning this small mistake, you brought it right to the voter's attention, and therefore are attempting to win the 'Who had better spelling and grammar?' section of the vote. You understood what I meant, but brought it up anyway. You seem to say this to give me a tip, well I don't need your tips. It seems like you may need mine. Here's a tip for you. When attempting to highlight a mistake in someone's grammar, don't make a mistake! You repeat the word 'people' in my quote, which technically isn't a quote as I did not repeat the word 'people'. The only reason I'm going into so much detail into this is because you had a bone to pick with the stupidest, most insignificant part of the debate. Stop being so unnecessarily pedantic. 'To me, it seems like human emotions should be taken into account.' I agree, but in relation with human lives, I don't think people's emotions are worth more. 'I agree that it is a couple's decision whether to have sex or not. At this point, I don't really think there is much more to say about that. So let's move on from there.' Please address my point instead of saying 'let's move on from there'. My point was that people know possible consequences of sex, so they should take responsibility. Instead of addressing this you just tried to move on and ignore it. 'If she doesn't have an abortion and has the child then, that child will most likely end up growing up in poverty. Do you really want that for a kid?' I know that I would prefer a child to have a life at all then to be killed based on YOUR presumptions as to what makes a life worth more to live. If death is preferable to poverty, why not kill all of the homeless? 'It's not like were doing it when it would hurt them and they would be aware of it.' If a child who couldn't feel pain and was deaf was shot in the back of the head, she wouldn't be aware of it and wouldn't feel pain, but the act of shooting her is horrible. ' I believe that it should be our choice.' As much choice as getting to decide if you should pull the trigger of a gun and kill a random passerby. ' I don't think it is fair for Con to try and limit my options.' ??? Did you not read my previous argument, you know the one where I said 'Well go on then. What's your third option, I'd love to hear it' I'm still waiting. Since you have failed to provide at least a third option, you have proved me right, as I said there were only two options remaining. I know you are 'Pro-Choice', but at least try to keep your choices within the bounds of logic. '...what difference would it make to you if a mother has to carry a child for nine months?' Because I believe that every fetus is a human life, and is worthy of our rights. I could never be silent if I believed that something as precious as human life was being destroyed in it's most purest of forms, mostly because of the fact that many people have no responsibility when it comes to sex. You haven't refuted me. You claim the fetus isn't worthy of human rights, but nowhere you have explained how or why. If the fetus really isn't human and worthy of our values and rights, then tell me how. You are acting as if the debate is over. It isn't, there are still two more rounds to go. But since you seem so eager to leave this debate, let's recap where we stand now. I give reasons why the fetus is worthy of human rights, you don't refute them. I say that people need to take more responsibility, you ignore me. I mention how the seriously disabled need help, therefore refuting your point about the fetus not being viable for human life, you ignore it. We both provide two hypothetical examples involving taking the other's statement on emotions and life to the extreme, yet you fail to explain how emotions are more valuable than life in the context of abortion. You seem to think that poverty is worse than death.