On balance, abortion is immoral

RapeAbortion is justified when a rape victim is justified from pregnancy. Philocat argues that abortion is not justifiable and is equivalant to a murder of a human being. However, getting rid of an undeveloped fetus/embryo that can't think, isn't conscious, and has no history of consciousness (unless you believe in reincarnation), isn't equal to having a teenage girl suffer. If a teenage rape victim was pregnant, it would be very bad for her on a mental level. She may come to school feeling upset, people can see she is clearly pregnant. It would be a very emotionally bad experience for her and she can't even do anything about it, abortion is illegal. If abortion was legal, she could get rid of it and she likely wouldn't feel as bad. She could also get her mind of abortion and start to mentally heal herself. This would not be possible when pregnant because she would always be reminded about getting raped. She can clearly look in the mirror and only feel more upset about being raped. Men may never even understand the damage of that, men don't get pregnant. If a young teenage girl was suffering from pregnancy and writing this, she could go in much more depth and detail than I ever could. Philocat can argue his points but he will never even truley understand what it's like to be pregnany pre-maturely. It should honestly be a choice for the woman, is abortion or premature pregnancy worse? So the decesion is not as my opponent argues:A: Someone will undergo nine months of unwanted pregnancyB: Someone will be killedWe can conclude that the decesion is more like this: A: A teenage girl had to undergo a mentally damaging situation for nine whole months.B: A non-conscious embryo/fetus that is undeveloped and not able to do much is aborted.I know there are rape children that are alive and living perfectly fine, I just brought it up as a small point, nothing too relevant. However, what a rape child would have to suffer through is orphanage. We would clearly need to solve the orphanage problem because there are millions of orphans worldwide that don't receive help. (1)Human genepoolWhile it is wrong to go around killing genetically ill patients, can we honestly compare a living person to a fetus/embryo? A living person has gone through many things, they have a history of consciousness. A living person has a brain in which they can think, they are fully developed and alive human beings. Genetically ill patients also do not live up to the quality of life, it would be better to abort them to prevent them from suffering while inside the womb. And it is true that this is an eugenic argument, eugenics is not always cruel. The Nazis obviously went overboard but eugenics does not simply mean to genocide against people with undesirable traits.I would like to bring up another point that we are secluding ourself from many things in nature. A genetically ill patient would be doomed to be killed by natural selection. Every person you see with a severe disorder would have never survived naturally. Because of natural selection failing to work, humans should take on the course of improving the genepool in non-cruel ways. Abortion is considarably a non-cruel way to improve the genome pool. Nature can no longer improve our genepool so it is important for ourselves to take action. I understand that going around killing people with disorders is very bad, but abortion is different as I have explained. ConsciousnessA fetus/embryo that isn't conscious and far from being a developed human is relevant to be gotten rid of in some cases. Philocat's argument of killing a non-conscious teen in a state of non-consciousness is wrong so abortion is wrong. A teen has brain activity and they are a developed individual. More importantly, a teenage has a HISTORY of consciousness. Does an embryo/fetus have a history of consciousness? No, it does not. A young-term embryo/fetus shows little to no signs of brain activity, they don't have a consciousness. An embryo/fetus is simply a human-looking clump of cells. Philocat has failed to seen that I have used a sperm and egg as an example of a common "pro-life" argument. If a fetus/embryo's exterminating is wrong because it has potential, why isn't killing sperm and eggs wrong? A sperm an egg are both living things, they are however not conscious nor do they have a history of consciousness. A fetus/embryo is the same way. Both of them have potential of a future human life. Philocat argues that a sperm does not have potential of a future human life, but it in fact does. A sperm carries DNA and so does an egg. When a sperm fertilizes an egg, it doesn't go running away, rather it sort of merges with the egg and becomes an embryo. (1) MoralsNot only do people have different morality but morals don't really exist. Morals are just a made up concept in your head, nothing else. I am just simply stating we can't just call abortion "moral" or "immoral." You can't just say, this is immoral, let's not do this. This is moral, we can justify in doing this.Anyhows, discussing the realitivity of morals is another debate, as this debate is focused on abortion. Let's not go off topic here.Black-market abortionsMy opponent used a biased site for statistics. It's important to rely on more unbiased sources statistics speaking. While on a topic like abortion, relying on biased sources for arguments isn't bad. However, relying on biased sources for statistics may distort things. Legality of abortion does in fact have an effect on safety."Worldwide, an estimated 68 000 women die as a result of complications from unsafe induced abortions every year—about eight per hour.6 This prevalence translates into an estimated case-fatality rate of 367 deaths per 100 000 unsafe abortions, which is hundreds of times higher than that for safe, legal abortion in developed nations." (4) This clearly debunks Philocat's whole argument on abortion deaths having nothing to do with legality. I already explained why abortion is inequivelant to murder in my previous arguments.It is also cruel to risk a woman's health, possibly life because they disagree with one on abortion. Conclusion1: If a woman is raped, especially a young teenage girl, exterminating a fetus/embryo is the lesser evil over making a young woman suffer.2: Abortion for improving the human genepool is not equal to killing born people to improve the human genepool. Natural selection would have killed the disordered people naturally speaking. 3: A fetus isn't conscious, and it doesn't have a hsitory of consciousness thus making it justifiable to exterminate.4: It's true that sperm and eggs are different from a fetus/embryo, but the pro-life logic eventually applies to both. 5: I just brung up morality as a quick statement as why I don't like using the term morality. 6: There is evidence showing that countries with illegal abortion have higher abortion fatality rates over countries with legal abortion. http://www.sos-usa.org...http://www.opednews.com...http://www.ucsfhealth.org...http://www.who.int...