Abortion should be illegal.

== Rebuttal ==There are no unique advantages to the plan, and I will proceed to show that while offering an overview of the debate. (1) PainPro's argument is that the uncertainty here is sufficient to ban abortion. But there's no uncertainty. All scientists agree that it is impossible to feel pain without the pain receptors actually detecting the pain. There is "no evidence" that the subcortex can account for pain because there's no mechanism for it to do so. Even the mere possibility doesn't exist. [Rd. 2, Source 8] Pro drops all my sources here which demonstrate entirely that the subcortex has no reception of pain whatsoever, that the nerves aren't wired up to the cortex to cause pain, and that the fetus lacks any such mechanism before 24 weeks. (2) Psychological harmsPro doesn't respond to the study I cited from Susan A. Cohen that clearly demonstrates how the methodology of every study that suggests a link between having an abortion and receiving psychological damage is wrong. Pro also doesn't rebut that women who want abortions but don't receive them due to laws preventing them, etc. , actually feel great regret and stress, or perhaps even depression. Pro also doesn't address that raped women don't feel any psychological harm from receiving abortions, so insofar as abortion is permissible in cases of rape, you can vote them down anyway. Extend that counseling sessions are demonstrably effective in reducing the suicide rate, or rate of any form of psychological harm, significantly. Pro then mistakenly asserts that we "ignored" the point about partners, but we proved that counseling sessions work on both men and women, and that there isn't significant harm from abortion at all, as my source #10 proves, which Pro drops. Pro tries to do an impact analysis by saying that there are more than a million people committing suicide each year, which outweighs any of my impact. The dishonesty hear is hilarious, because Pro's source #1 just talks about all people who commit suicide, not people who commit suicide *because* of abortions. Banning abortion won't save millions of people. Also, suicide is a self-regarding act, which means there's no harm to a non-consensual other caused by this. People should be made aware of the harms of abortion. This isn't an argument against abortion itself, merely about the context in which the abortion happens. Restrictions (e. g. mandatory counseling before and after the abortion) can stop this. (3) RapePro drops all the impacts. The mother and child both face ostracism from society. The child -- even giving birth -- is a constant reminder to the mother of the oppression and domination faced during the intensely painful rape. Source #12 proves that there are actual, severe psychological harms from giving birth out of rape. If a mother chooses to have an abortion during this time, there's nothing to stop her, because there's no evidence of any psychological harm from rape victims, and the harm principle allows the mother to do that. These severe psychological harms outweigh the uncertainty associated with fetal pain (but there's no evidence of pain whatsoever, as proved above). Pro then makes the utterly outrageous claim that any harm caused here is self-caused. That's extremely offensive and outrageous, and has no basis whatsoever in truth. The pain and oppression rape victims face is beyond what Pro seems to be able to fathom, and source #12 has already demonstrated with evidence that Pro dropped that severe psychological harm results from being denied an abortion which is needed if raped. Rape is the ultimate act of dominance, a painful, oppressive, and torturous force with vestiges of pain. The government further allows those vestiges of oppression to remain by preventing rape victims from having abortions, for no reason except non-existent "uncertainty" that fetuses feel pain (which is solved by anesthesia). That's not to mention the ostracism rape victims and children face from society because of that, which, tellingly, Pro drops. (4) Back-alley abortionsPro says the number of fetal deaths caused by legal abortion outweighs the deaths of sentient humans from back-alley abortions (which, as Pro concedes, will increase if abortion is banned). But utilitarianism -- a framework which Pro agrees with -- isn't just about numbers. It's about mental states. We've shown over and over again that the fetus is not due *any* consideration in a utilitarian calculus, while these women, driven by extreme realities to back-alley abortion (because such a risky procedure is taken for a reason: fear of damage and ostracism), face uncertainty and death. And if we're counting fetuses, I've proven that fetuses die from back-alley abortion too, which Pro drops. Conclusion: The fetus doesn't feel pain and there's no uncertainty there, because there's no mechanism by which the fetus's subcortex could possibly cause pain. The harms from banning abortion (e. g. the deaths of multiple women, and psychological harms) far outweigh. Not to mention, rape victims face severe and serious harms from being forced to carry the fetus borne of rape, which Pro completely dismisses while dropping all associated evidence.