The government should not regulate abortion

You make a mistake by only addressing one part of this debate. At this point this is your position- a very small number of abortions occur after the 25-32 weeks so the government has the obligation to regulate abortions. Please stick to your original argument. This debate is only three rounds which means if you were to bring up any new arguments I would only have one opportunity to respond. One response is not enough to have a developed debate. The rights based argument, with which you say I defeat my own position, only accounts for .08% of all abortions that take place- an insignificant number when you consider my other two arguments- regulating abortion doesn't actually decrease the number of abortions that take place and protecting women's reproductive rights. But what is the reason for these late term abortions? The majority of these abortions stem from a failing health care system especially for women's prenatal care. These problems are all descriptive of the status quo, but in no way does regulating abortion actually solve for these problems. Not allowing women to consult with professionals when seeking abortion services only poses more of a threat to women's reproductive health. Unless you can prove that regulating abortions will result in the immediate halt of all abortions- there is no reason that the government should intervene on such decisions. These late term abortions also occur because a problem with the fetus has occurred that could threaten women's health during delivery. Denying women access to medical services that enable them to regulate their fertility or terminate a dangerous pregnancy amounts to a refusal to provide health care to women. The small number of abortions that take place is outweighed by the fact that these abortions will take place post-legislation which guarantees the terminated pregnancy but also threatens the mother's life. Even if those voting think that I have lost the rights-based argument, this does not mean that I have lost the debate. The government cannot and never does legislate morality. My opponent may try and say that laws against murder, stealing, speeding etc. are legislations of morality, but these laws were instated for completely different reasons- to prevent anarchy. While these laws in some way affect a large part of society, only a woman has to deal with the emotional consequences of terminating a pregnancy. You have also disregarded two thirds of this debate. I have mentioned the first so I will not go in depth on this issue. You concede that abortions will take place no matter what and making abortions illegal only denies women access to safe abortions. It is simply a part of human nature- if a women wants an abortion she will find a method to do so. The alternative to legal and safe abortions would be the illegal "back alley" abortions. Allowing women access to safe abortions, in addition to the prior consultation which ensures a safer operation, is comparatively advantageous to what you are advocating. Finally- the issue of women's rights. Women should be involved in decisions that affect their lives and futures. To refuse on principle to permit a woman to consider her life or welfare when it seems threatened by pregnancy is to say that only men are the recipients of political freedom and responsibility. It is also to say that the primacy of the right to bodily life of the fetus places all other considerations, including the health, worth, and dignity of women, on a lower level. It is a form of gender discrimination. According to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, discrimination against women includes laws that have either the effect or the purpose of preventing a woman from exercising any of her human rights or fundamental freedoms on a basis of equality with men. Laws that ban abortion have just that effect. Restricting abortion has the effect of denying women access to a procedure that may be necessary for their enjoyment of their right to health. Also you do not contest that allowing the government to intervene on personal decisions sets a dangerous precedent. Also, I have a few questions: 1. If the fetus you save is a homosexual, will you still fight for its rights? 2. Do you believe in protecting all life(human)? 3. Are you in favor of taxes/our welfare system? Happy Holidays