Abortion

To start off, my opponent has failed to respond to my overview where I explain that rights are not, and cannot be inviolable. So, we vote Pro right there. But I will respond to each of his points. ==== "According to http://dictionary.reference.com......, Possession (the one that applies most to our current topic) is "the control over oneself, one's mind, etc." Now, a fetus can move itself. A fetus has simple thought patterns. A fetus can tell itself to kick. A fetus possesses its body. Why do you think that the fetus does not posses its own body? - Let me rephrase the question: Would you enjoy being killed in a way similar to that of a fetus?" - ==== No I would not. But I fail to see how this is relevant. Whether or not I would enjoy the process, or indeed, whether or not the fetus enjoys the process is irrelevant to the overall argument. And to answer the possession argument, it really depends on how far you are willing to stretch "control over ones self". I suppose that while technically fetus' have independence of movement, etc, when you consider their surroundings, no, not really. Would you consider someone who was locked in a straight-jacket day and night, and force-fed, to have "control over ones self"? Technically they control their muscle movements, but really, they do not have have control over themselves. ==== Wrong. Humans cannot survive without nutrients we sap from earth. We need the sun, the earth, foood, etc. We aren't self-sufficient. If you base humanity partially on the ability to sustain itself without outside help, then you consider humans un-human. ==== Your analysis of my argument is incorrect. All life is dependent on energy from the sun. That is not what I am talking about. If all humans were only able to derive sustenance from the lining of a polar bear's stomach, and had to live inside said stomach in order to survive, that would be an example of what I am talking about. ==== So, emotion = human and/or sentience? Well, if you look at the video I posted in the argument above, I think you can clearly see the expression of pain and despair on its face. If not, either a) get reading glasses, or b) watch the video in HD. ==== No. Discernable emotion is one characteristic of humanity. If that characteristic is missing, we know the thing is not human. If it exists, it means it may be human. As for the video, all I see are low resolution images of a thing with the same general form of a child. Can't really make out any emotion. ==== A person is not always forced to hold that pregnancy. There are many other options, such as vitro-fertilization. If there is a person who, by law, is killed without a say nor care, there is an issue. I understand that there are people out there who cannot support babies. They can adopt, but they cannot kill. ==== In-vitro fertilization is a method of getting pregnant without having sex, not a way of getting rid of a pregnancy without killing the child(http://en.wikipedia.org...). Furthermore, I am not supporting that law mandate every child is aborted. That would be ridiculous. ==== Yes. No one has the right to kill another. If the baby is born and the mother dies (Unlikely in the US), it is tragic -- but life for the child can go on. Let me explain... an abortion can kill any single baby to twins and beyond. Therefore, we can conclude that there are more deaths to abortion than being forced to carry the child. If the baby dies, in my opinion, it is worse -- the mother has had an opportunity to live and experience life, whereas the child has not. ==== No, I mean any situation. For example, if killing a child was the only way to stop a nuclear missile launch, would it still be immoral to kill the child? I recognize that this situation is incredibly unlikely to come to pass, but if an absolutist position, such as the pro-life position, cannot stand up to any situation, it is invalid. In this case, it is weighing the lives of one child against that of millions of people, and saying the child is more important. ==== Well, even an hour before birth, the baby is dependent on the mother -- and by your own definition, not human. You may not do it personally, but your logic could allow you. (Sorry... by seconds I mean minutes... it was ate at night! :D) ==== Nope. An hour before birth, it could probably be delivered by Caesarian section. Like I said, the point at which a fetus could be independent of the mother is a gray area. ==== Well, I would like to point out that the fetus will usually become beneficial. A baby cannot benefit, but with time, s/he could become productive, moral, and helpful to society. ==== That is fine, but irrelevant. You, by saying the relationship is symbiotic, rather than parasitic, must show that while the fetus is in the womb, not afterwards, the relationship is symbiotic, which you have not done. ==== Tell me, why did you not answer my question on the earlt-born: What about a baby born early? Are they not dependent on their little oxygen tanks? Without them they would die! Dos this mean they cannot receive the rights of a human? (This can also go for an elderly person with breathing issues.) ==== This is addressed under willing vs unwilling parasite. ==== http://www.abortiontv.com...... abortionno.org Since my opponent wants alternative reasons not to have an abortion, I shall provide another: The health of the woman. Here is a basic overview of consequences of abortion: By Mrs. Ann Warner [ Visit http://www.christianliferesources.com...... in addition] Physical Effects: Miscarriages Ectopic Pregnancies Perforated Uterus/Infections Nervousness Frigidity Sterility/Stillbirths Shock Fever/Cold Sweats Loss of Other Organs Psychological Effects: Unfulfillment/Sense of Loss Loss of Confidence in Decision-Making Intense Interest in Babies Loss of Interest in Sexual Contact Feeling of Dehumanization Feelings of Being exploited Flashback of the Actual Abortion Guilt/Suicidal Impulses Anniversaries (of Actual Due Date and Abortion Date) Eating Disorders Sleeping Disorders Low Self-Esteem Fear of Something Happening to One of their Other Children Problem with Trusting Another Partner Fear of Never Being Given Another Pregnancy Depression/Anxiety Interruption of the Bonding Process with Present and/or Future Children Survival Guilt Alcohol/Drug Abuse ======= O.k, and all of that is bad stuff. But it does not matter until you show the frequency with which those symptoms actually occur. Otherwise, it could only be one in a hundred or one in a thousand who actually has serious problems. And then the harm is relatively mild. Second, a lot of the physical issues could occur with any surgery, and all of the psychological issues can be caused by a different thing. Postpartum depression. From the inestimable Wikipedia "Symptoms of PPD can occur anytime in the first year postpartum[2] and include, but are not limited to, the following: * Sadness * Hopelessness * Low self-esteem * Guilt * Sleep and eating disturbances * Inability to be comforted * Exhaustion * Emptiness * Anhedonia * Social withdrawal * Low or no energy * Becoming easily frustrated * Feeling inadequate in taking care of the baby * Impaired speech and writing * Spells of anger towards others * Increased anxiety or panic attacks * Increased sex drive" http://en.wikipedia.org... So you need to show that the consequences of the abortion are worse than could otherwise happen. And you have not. So, to recap. My opponent continues to accept my evaluation method for this round, of utilitarianism. When we see that we measure things by the happiness produced, and that there are situations where abortion creates a greater amount of happiness than unhappiness, such as in situations where the mother is economically inadequate to the