Abortion is generally immoral.

As she is a veteran debater here on the site, I imagine she will offer quite the challenge. On MoralityBefore touching on abortion, I would simply like to touch on morality. There are certainly some truths which are subjective (e. g. your favorite ice cream flavor, sports team, or band). However, there are some truths which are objective -- they are true regardless of opinion. For example, it was once commonly believed that the world was flat but this did not change the fact that the Earth is an oblate spheroid. It is my contention that the killing of an innocent human is wrong, innocent meaning that they have not committed a crime or an act deserving of being killed. The crux of my argument rests on the scientific and philosophical facts that what is present from fertilization is a living human, and killing an innocent living human is wrong. In order for Con to win the debate, all she has to do is prove that a preborn organism that dwells in a human uterus is not a living human. Scientific Evidence. It is a scientific fact that what is present when an egg is fertilized is a new, unique human being. All of the necessary qualifications for life are present, including (but not limited to) response to stimuli, growth, cell division, and respiration. We can know that a preborn human is alive because it grows. Secondly, we know it is human because it has human DNA, and it is the product of human parents. Living beings reproduce after their own kind: cats have cats, dogs have dogs, and humans have humans. Never in the history of humanity have two humans procreated and the organism dwelling within the mother was non-human, then became human at some other point in its life. In fact, embryologists (who are the experts on the topic) are in agreement that once the sperm and egg come together, a new, unique human is brought into existence. This is a quote from the most used textbook on embryology. The authors state: Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a 'moment') is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte. " [1]Philosophical Argument. All humans have an inherent right to life. The right to live is the most basic and fundamental right of every human being. It is wrong to kill an innocent human being. A preborn human has not committed a crime, and certainly has done nothing worthy of being killed for it. Africans were once discriminated against and made as slaves. Women were once discriminated against and viewed as property. Neither African-Americans nor women were allowed to vote at one point in our nation's past. The Jews were discriminated against during the Holocaust. Our world is filled with discrimination (and note, I'm not comparing abortionists or women who get abortions to Nazis, this is merely to illustrate the discrimination that has gone on in the world). The unborn are still discriminated against and killed through the act of abortion. Humans are valuable based on the very thing that they are. There is no substantial change that occurs during the passing from womb into the world that suddenly bestows value upon a human. Value is an intrinsic property of humanity and as such, it is not something that is acquired. No one would argue that an infant is more valuable as a human than an adult, so obviously value is not something humans get "in degrees. " You are either valuable or you are not. I look forward to Con's response on the matter. [1] Ronan O'Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.