Abortion should be legal.

I accept. As Con, I will argue that abortion should not be legal. In what follows now, I will first present my argument and then refute what Pro said in his first round. But before I do this, I would first like to note something important. Although I am against abortion, there is one situation in which I believe that abortion is justifiable, namely, when the life of the mother is directly threatened.My ArgumentShould abortion (the killing of an fetus from the uterus in order to end a pregnancy) be legal? Well, in order to answer that question, we must first know what the fetus is. If the fetus is just a meaningless thing, like for example an insect, then why shouldn't it be legal to kill it? However, what about if the fetus is a human being? Should abortion be legal then? Of course not. It would be absurd to argue that abortion should be legal if the fetus is a human being. So, what is the fetus? Is it a human being? Yes. We know from science that from the earliest stages of development, the fetus is a distinct and living human being. In fact, we also know from science that a new human being comes into existence at conception, as the standard text of Human Embryology and Teratology states, "Although human life is a continuous process, fertilization/conception is a critical landmark, because under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed." [1]Indeed, it is surely absurd to say that the unborn isn't a human being. If it isn't a human being, then what is it? A lion? Or maybe a cat? Of course not. The fetus is obviously biologically human, genetically human, and a distinct member of the species homo sapiens. Even Peter Singer himself, although being a pro-choice philosopher, accept the humanity of the unborn: "It is possible to give 'human being' a precise meaning. We can use it as equivalent to 'member of the species Homo sapiens'. Whether a being is a member of a given species is something that can be determined scientifically, by an examination of the nature of the chromosomes in the cells of living organisms. In this sense there is no doubt that from the first moments of its existence an embryo/fetus conceived from human sperm and eggs is a human being." [2]David Boonin, also a pro-choice philosopher, writes:"Perhaps the most straight forward relation between you and me on the one hand and every human fetus on the other is this: All are living members of the same species, homo sapiens. A human fetus after all is simply a human being at a very early stage in his or her development." [3]Pro's ArgumentPro said two things in his first round. Pro first said that "The legality behind abortion is very clear. Our "unalienable rights" -- as implicitly stated in the Constitution -- ensure us "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." That's exactly right. However, the right to life, liberty and happiness, is something which the fetus should be given too, because as I have clearly showed, the fetus is also a human being.After saying this, Pro said that "Without legalizing abortion, women wouldn't be granted the right to care for their own bodies and make decisions regarding their unborn child/children."This is completely mistaken. Without legalizing abortion, what women really wouldn't be granted the right to do, is to kill an innocent human being. ConclusionThe fetus, as I have clearly showed, is a human being. Thus, abortion (which is the killing of an human being, namely, the fetus) should not be legal.Sources[1] http://www.caseforlife.com... This site presents several quotations from medical experts in the field of embryology who all confirms the fact that the fetus is a human being and that a new human being comes into existence at conception.[2] Peter Singer, Practical Ethics, page 85-86.[3] David Boonin, A Defense of Abortion, page 20.