Resolved: A just society ought to ban abortion

They may have spared pro some trouble, but not only do they seem better said now as part of my rebuttal, they also may serve pro better now that he (or she) has had the opportunity to make the argument he wanted. ConcessionsA zygote-embryo-fetus is aliveIt converts nutrients and oxygen into energy that allows for cell division, multiplication, and growth. It is alive. A zygote-embryo-fetus is humanIts DNA is that of homo-sapien, it is a human. Allowed to mature it will become a person. Personhood is ambiguousUnless absolutely necessary within the context of the debate, I will not argue over “personhood” – only realize that each side has somewhat conflicting definitions. RebuttalP1 and P2 seem reversed in order. That is, to claim that the “killing of innocent being with a future-like-ours (FLO) is morally wrong. ” before saying that “a fetus is an innocent human being” is a little backwards. To aid in clarity, I will respond to both P1 and P2 under P2. P1) Intentionally killing an innocent being with a future-like-ours (FLO) is morally wrong. P2) A fetus is an innocent human being with FLO. This notion of innocence of a fetus is problematic in several ways. First, it is understood that the unwanted fetus has no ill intent. It, like a parasite, is just doing what it naturally does. But, is it harmless? Not entirely. There are physical risks to any pregnancy, and a fetuses dependence on a woman’s body means it is not harmless, therefor not innocent. No one makes the claim that the fetus is intentionally attacking the mother’s body, but the fetus is doing just that. That it has no control is not the fault of the woman or the fetus. What this argument of innocents is – is innocent in a sentimental way. The same way we refer to adorable animals. The implication is, how could pro-choice be so cruel to kill this cute helpless thing. Juxtaposing the fetus with the immoral person who had careless sex. A woman has the right to defend herself. Granting a fetus a rights that no other person has, the right to use another’s body without their consent is not moral not just. Shaming a woman for her choice is not moral or just. P3) Abortion intentionally kills the human being. As I have described in my concessions above, this is non-controversial. Abortion kills a zygote-embryo-fetus that is human. While not critical to the argument, I enjoy using quotes. The two you have chosen are of interest to me, and are common to the pro-life debater. I present my thoughts on each. "I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born. "Ronald ReaganThis often used quote is really a genetic fallacy. It does not deal with the argument, but attempts to prey on sympathies. The simple answer for me is, it is meaningless. There is no way to know what fetus responses would be, similar to asking anyone how they would respond to a hypostatical they could never encounter. The fetus is gone and has no ability to wish for a different outcome. "A person's a person no matter how small"Dr. SeussLet me start with some words about Dr. Seuss himself. First, he objected to this quote being used by the pro-life community. It was misused from the start, and he did not like the meaning getting twisted. His “dust speck civilization” was a story about racism and prejudice (relating to post WW2 Japan). It was a metaphor for a minority group having “no voice” not small people (literally) being worth as much as normal sized people. That Seuss himself did not like the misappropriation of the quote is tough luck. That is, anyone may use it regardless of bastardization of the authors’ intent. What is more interesting to me about the use of this quote is the necessity of the pro-life community to manipulate emotion. The argument does not stand on its own, it must have help from jingoistic manipulation. Rebuttal ConclusionThe attempt to criminalize the act of women seeking abortion is immoral. The pro-life side must turn these women into something other than what they are to make the argument work. The fetus is innocent, while the woman “should not have had sex if she didn’t want a baby”. Slut shaming and turning women into criminals. Regardless of intent, pro-life is favoring the rights and decisions of one over another based on personal morality and emotion. Fetuses die every day. For every successful embryo that implants, there are five to nine that miscarry. The death of embryos is normal. The addition of choice to the possibly that a women got enough to eat in the days before ovulation is rational, moral and a necessity in a just society. Note: Since pro has forfeited his last round, I will refrain from posting additional arguments until he or she returns.