Abortion should be banned.

Thank you. Refutations "Locke for example defined a person as "a thinking intelligent being that can know itself as the same thinking thing in different times and places"(1). By this definition no fetus would ever be a person." Google defines person as "a human being regarded as an individual." Based on this definition and the fact that Pro admitted that a fetus is a person, a fetus is a person. The fetus is an individual inside another; this does not make it any less human. Dependency does not reduce someone's status to nonhuman. " In the sixth week the entire embryo is smaller than the size of a dime (7). This should give an impression of the mental capabilities of an embryo at this age and concluding that it feels just as we do is erroneous." Remember that I proved that the fetus has brainwaves at this point. So what if the embryo is small? Does size make you more or less human? " Desires are necessary in order for a being to have a right to life. The fetus acquires organized cortical brain activity between 25 and 32 weeks gestation." The fetus does have brainwaves, so it does have thoughts and feelings to live, as stated previously last round. The problem with the desire view is that they may not see themselves as distinct unique persons . Also, many people do not desire to live such as suicidal people or brainwashed people who believe their life has no meaning. Does it make it any more justifiable to kill them? Constitutive Being Argument Premise 1: You are the same being as you were when you were a fetus Premise 2 You are a person (hopefully:) ) Conclusion: The fetus is a person Defense of Premise 1: You are the same being as you were as when you were a fetus, as the fetus was an organism that developed and became what you are today. The fetus is simply the earliest stage of being a human. Defense of Premise 2: I hope you're a person. Robots are not allowed to debate on this site, sorry. "P1. A fertilized ovum has a FLO. P2. If one single cell that can develop into a person (fertilized ovum) has a FLO, any single cell that can develop into a person has a FLO. P3. Denying such a cell a FLO is immoral. P4. Abortion denies FLO's C1. Abortion is immoral. P5. A fetus consist at some point of totipotent cells (TC). P6. All TC's can develop into persons if separated. C2. All TC's have a FLO. C3. Not separating TC's is denying them a FLO. C4. Not separating TC's is immoral." The problem with this is that the fetus is a person that will have a Future Like Ours, if nature takes it course normally without interference in the term of abortion. The totipotent cells will only be human through unnatural separation, which is not the same because the fetus is already a human as Con conceded. A human with potential is completely different from a cell. Conclusion Pro's main arguments have to do with the fetus not being a person, as that is the crux of the debate. However, I have refuted Pro claims that fetus isn't a person. Pro states that a person is "a thinking intelligent being that can know itself as the same thinking thing in different times and places". This is inherently flawed as by that definition intelligent aliens would be considered people. By the SAME definition, infants would not be considered persons nor would the mentally disabled. Pro would then have to defend the morality of killing infants and mentally disabled or handicapped. It is morally wrong to kill humans because their future of value. The fetus is a human, refer to Constitutive Being. Back to Con!