Abortion should remain legal.

We all start some time, right? Just use sources so this doesn't become an opinion based debate.Arguments:Now, I have debated this topic a few times, and there always seems to be the argument that "Abortion is murder." However, Abortion is NOT murder. Basing this argument on the definition of murder I have supplied, one must kill a person, a living, breathing human being. I say living and breathing because you must be alive in order to be murdered. Now, we ask the grand question, What is life? How can we define when something is alive? We can use the definition I have given above or we can use the general idea of life: when something is alive and breathing, when something has the ability to move and grow. Now, life is a combination of all of these things, you cannot live only being able to grow or only being able to breath, you must follow all conditions in order to be fully alive. Under these definitions, it is proven that a fetus is not alive and therefore cannot be murdered. As stated earlier, fetus does not breath, it is given its oxygen through its mother’s umbilical cord and takes its first breath after it has been born [1] [2]. Now I realize that a baby can be qualified as dead if the heart stops beating, as can everyone else, but they are also qualified as dead when they stop breathing. (I do not want to sound repetitive or make irrelevant points, but you cannot stop what you have not started, meaning that the baby cannot stop breathing in fetus because the fetus does not breath.) Cases in which someone is choking, it is essential to perform the Heimlich maneuver in order to ensure that all airways are open so the victim does not black out or die. In the case of a miscarriage, do we hold the mother accountable for involuntary manslaughter? This is defined above as an unintentional action and can still be punishable by time in prison. Though it appears not to be the mother’s fault, if abortion is murder, then how can we neglect to realize that miscarriages are involuntary manslaughter? Now, I would like to state that science has not found the exact moment in which the fetus is alive, so if Con decides that I cannot state that abortion is not murder, then I ask and assume that Con will not say that abortion is murder unless refuting my argument with reliable sources. Consensual Sex, Rape and Unplanned Pregnancies On the topic of abortion, many people bring up consensual sex and rape, rape most commonly used as the special circumstance many Pro-Life advocates allow for abortions. Now, I am no one to interfere on their continuity, but I do not believe rape is a special case, I believe it is an extreme case that should follow under any allowances given to any other woman- to get an abortion. According to Guttmacher Institute, about half of the estimated 6.7 million pregnancies in the US are unplanned [3]. Also, about half of the female population will experience an unplanned pregnancy by the age of 45 and about three in ten of these women will end up terminating their pregnancy [3]. Do we have the right to force the mother to keep the baby solely because she consented to participate in these sexual activities? Do we have the right to take away another’s right as we continue to fight for other rights? Why do we take away the rights of a woman because she has the potential to have a baby? In the case of rape, I believe that both sides have come to a blurry agreement that rape may be the exception to the “No Abortion” preaches of Pro-Life advocates. If some do not believe that rape is not an exception, an occurrence undeserving of abortion, why do we not allow the mother to get rid of a pregnancy that is a reminder of what someone forcefully had done to her? More of a thought-provoking question, If we do not force the woman to keep an unwanted baby from rape, why do we not allow her the same opportunities to get rid of an unwanted baby? Keep in mind, the sex was consensual, not the baby. When it comes to unplanned pregnancies, we cannot overlook the boom in teenage pregnancies that are glorified by shows like Teen Mom or 16 and Pregnant. Dosomething.org shows that 3 in 10 teenage girls get pregnant before the age of 20 and that less than 2% of these teen mothers get college degrees before the age of 30 [4]. Do we force these teens to give birth to their babies, even if they do not want the babies for reasons unknown? If we expect them to give birth to the baby, do we then expect the mother to keep the baby? If we do not expect them to keep the baby, what do we suggest is done with the baby? If we expect the baby to go to an adoption center, do we neglect the consequences that the parents may have to face emotionally? The questions are endless and often unanswered. But with statistics like these, we cannot neglect this topic. Additional Fact: Guttmacher Institute states that 99.9% of women use contraceptives at least once in their sexual life and about 62% of the women currently use contraception [5]. It is clear that a majority of the population uses contraceptives to prevent any unwanted pregnancies, and although we all know we run the risk of pregnancy even with contraceptives, we cannot hold women accountable for a condom breaking or a pill not functioning properly. (I realize these are incomparable, but a condom breaking has the same, although extremely less severe, consequence as rape- unwanted pregnancies.) Unalienable Rights As Americans, we are constantly reminded of the unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness [6]. We are born with these rights as set by the Constitution, so therefore, the fetus does not get these rights until it is born. Without these rights, we cannot obligate the woman to keep the baby alive. You may think that this argument is illogical, but we have come to know that you are born with these rights. Although I have only asked 10 people, 9 of them responded that you are born with these rights while the other was confused about what unalienable rights were. Bodily Autonomy Bodily autonomy is defined as the right for a person to control what they do to their bodies without the interruption or force of someone else. It is a right that is given to everyone and is one of the reasons why it is illegal to take organs from the deceased that have not signed off permission. If we continue this right after life, why do we strip it from a pregnant woman? We cannot morally, or legally (in my opinion), strip away the rights that we grant to the deceased, and to go against this argument would be irrational. Why would you grant a dead person a right that you wouldn’t give to someone that is alive. I’ve read something that rings true, that if someone needs something donated that you have, you are not legally obligated to donate anything. This parallels to pregnancies because a fetus does need these resources, but the mother is not legally obligated to keep giving this baby her resources. Denying to give someone a body part is not illegal, so terminating a pregnancy should not be illegal. SOURCES:1. http://www.livestrong.com... 2. http://www.askdrsears.com... 3. http://www.guttmacher.org... 4. http://www.dosomething.org... 5. http://www.guttmacher.org... 6. http://www.americassurvivalguide.com...