On balance, abortion is immoral

RapeMy opponent states that abortion would cause long-term anxiety to one. While this could possibly be true for some woman, remember for many woman, avoiding pregnancy especially at a young age, would cause less damage to them. He then goes on to state that if it does cause an increase in happiness to the mother, it causes a decrease in "happiness" to the embryo/fetus. Remember that a fetus/embryo does not have a developed brain, it can not feel happiness what so ever. If the fetus grew and was born as a baby, remember it would assosciate with more health problems for the baby. Also do note that it would likely become another orphan, there's not much being done abour orphanage like I stated in round 3. My opponent then also tries to imply that abortion is murder. It is not murder if a cluster of cells that might develop into a human is being exterminated. That embryo/fetus can't think for itself, it has no consciousness, it's brain activity is extremely low or non-existant and etc. And to bring the mental harm argument again, a teenage girl suffering from pregnancy would seriously hurt them. They would go to school, possibly to be made fun of, they would suffer from extreme anxiety and etc. It should not be illegal to prevent a teenage girl whom would feel abortion is less of a harm to them than pre-mature pregnancy. Many teenage girls comply with the fact on abortion and rape victims would rather have one. Human Genepool/EugenicsPro states that my "history of consciousness" argument is irrelevant seeing as it has nothing to do with "killing." It actually is a valid argument, a non-conscious teenager or whatever will wake up with memories. Their brain is also capable to fully work and they are fully developed functioning human being. Is a fetus/embryo a fully developed and functioning human being? No. A fetus/embryo would wake up not knowing anything. They wouldn't have a history of consciousness, thus making it reasonable to abort. Pro is then implying that a dead person is not treated well and has a history of consciousness. However, a dead person is not alive and they will not wake up with a consciousness. He then goes on to state that abortion is murder, thus making every possible benefit of abortion wrong. He also states that "killing" one inside and outside the womb is no different. While late-term abortions may be somewhat equivelant to killing a baby, early-term abortions are nothing. It is not murder to get rid of a cluster of cells. Killing a developed human outside of the womb with a consciousness is completely different. Pro again is stating that the eugenical aim is to rentlessly kill people to improve the human genepool. This is not the case, as even people whom oppose the legalization of abortion can believe in eugenics. Eugenics may also state to restrict a minority of people with terrible genes from reproducing thus leading to less disorders. The eugenical aim of abortion is not murder. It is simply a way to prevent someone from being born to suffer from a severe gentic disorder. Killing disordered people outside the womb is not equal to aborting them when they aren't a developed human being. ConsciousnessPro states that brain activity makes killing a baby no different. They also state that:"'A teen is over four feet tall and they are a developed individual. More importantly, a teenager has facial hair. Does an embryo/fetus have facial hair? No, it does not'"Facial hair is not important, the brain activity is. If a person is not developed and show no brain activity, they are not considered a "valuable human being." I also mentioned in my arguments on "human genepool" why a history of consciousness is valid to the abortion debate.Also a sperm does not simply die when it fertilizes an egg, it simply merges with it and combines DNA. It then goes on to slowly develop. However, what's to say that at this point, suddenly someone is a valuable human being? We can then apply typical anti-abortion legalization to it. Exterminating an embryo is no different because it has their own set of DNA. A sperm also has DNA and the potential to a future human life. Black-market abortionsThe fact that abortions are unsafe and illegal in undeveloped nations is another hint to legalization. If developed nations like USA or Australlia have the technology for safe abortions and such, why should we revert to the ways of undeveloped nations such as India or Iraq? Also, outlawing abortion would not impact the fact people would still be getting abortions. Black market abortions can also be seen a chance of money for some people. The same with with black market drugs, people would not care about a woman's healthy, they just need to help a woman with abortion to get their share of money. Without the government there to regulate abortion, who knows how bad they could become? People in black markets care about money, they don't care about the crime they are doing most of the time. And if you read some of the sources I posted earlier, some black market abortions include cheap pills which are deadly. 1. http://www.livestrong.com...2. http://truthsite.org...3. http://www.commondreams.org...;