This House Concludes that Abortion is Murder

Before anything else, I would like to say thanks again to those who have delved this far into our debate. It is my hopes that you will find it more interesting and informational than the typical debates have been on this topic. I looks forward to seeing your comments and RFD's when the voting period begins.I'm sorry that my opponent feels antagonized by my use of images, bolded text and or italics to stress the points that I am trying to make. I have only posted two images thus far and that is too many? That seems a bit odd to me.As this is the final round for new arguments, I will be limiting my rebuttals to claims made by Con in our previous round. Key to this debate is Con's observation that it is my "impression that laws which keep abortion legal are unconstitutional." That has been my position from the inception of this debate. I don't know how it could have been made more obvious. It's interesting that my opponent thinks that the best response to my challenges on the Constitutionality of legalized abortion is to make an appeal to authority [1] and cite the very rulings by the court are being challenged as though they are an authority unto themselves. This is akin to using the Supreme Courts ruling in the Dred Scott case as the final word against those who were seeking to abolish slavery before it was finally abolished. My point to Con that the Supreme Court is not infallible seems to be something that he doesn't want to consider. Con, I do recognize the Supreme Court's role in 'judicial reviews' as you described them and you are correct when you say that I argue that the Court's rulings are Un-Constitutional. Also, I do not dispute that their word is 'the law.' I haven been consistent with those views from the beginning of this exchange. Also, I have never disputed that abortions are 'legal.' The question is - are they (abortions) 'lawful?' That is the crux of this debate. Though, my opponent has raised other points in round three that I want to respond to, I am anxious to further detail my arguments to support the claim that "Abortions are Murders." So, I will return to Con's points, providing that I have the ability to do so later in this round. "Abortion is Murder" - The Constitutional ArgumentMy opponent insisted in Round Two that; "In order for abortion to be murder, abortion must satisfy two components: it's got to be unlawful, and it's got to entail the killing of another human being." To address the legal definition of children in the womb, Under U.S. Federal Law (18 U.S. Code § 1841 [2]) "the term “unborn child” means a child in utero, and the term “child in utero” or “child, who is in utero” means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."It also says under 18 U.S. Code § 1841; "(C) If the person engaging in the (criminal) conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under sub paragraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111 ([3] MURDER ), 1112 ([4] MANSLAUGHTER), and 1113 ([5] Attempted Murder) of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being." I have no doubt that my opponent will be quick to point out the language of this (the Unborn Victims of Violence Act) that says the law can not be used to prosecute "any woman with respect to her unborn child." However, I want to make it clear to our readers and to our voters especially - THAT is the section that I believe to be UN-Constitutional and Unlawful. Does Con Deny that the Federal Law (U.S. Code 1841) defines a child in the womb 'in ANY stage of development' as a 'human being?'Does my opponent deny that U.S. Code 1841 already makes it a crime of MURDER to 'intentionally kill' a child in the womb 'in ANY stage of development' in a criminal act? At this point, Con may want to challenge the Constitutionality of the Federal and State Fetal Homicide Laws [6] in much the same way that I have been challenging the Roe v Wade decision and the Planned parenthood v Casey decision that Con linked to earlier. Indeed, several of those already already arrested & convicted under our Fetal Homicide Laws HAVE already tried to get those laws overturned - claiming that they are UNConstitutional - because they contradict and conflict with the Roe and Casey decisions [7]. However, it should be noted that to date, the Supreme Court has allowed those convictions to stand and has so far, they have refused to reconcile the disparity between our nations fetal homicide laws and the court's previous rulings. So, those convicted of MURDER for their part in illegal abortions will remain in prison for their crimes against the children that they killed. (see news story linked to earlier [8])Last round, I tried to explain to Con how the Pro-Life movement has taken the words of Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart to heart. The resulting Federal and State's Laws that make it a crime of MURDER to criminally kill a child in the womb (in any stage of development) are a testament to that effort. We have done as Justice Stewart said. We have laws which not only define a child in the womb as a human being... those laws also already make it a crime of MURDER to criminally kill one. Some may demand to know what makes the exceptions that the Fetal Homicide laws make for abortions - UnConstitutional / Unlawful? The answer is actually very simple. The 5th Amendment to the Constitution [9] says that no person shall "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Likewise, the 14th Amendment says that no State shall "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.[10]" So, we have a law (several actually) which define a 'child in the womb' as "a human being in ANY stage of development while in the womb." Those laws already make it a crime of MURDER to intentionally kill a child in the womb in a criminal act and by doing so, they establish the PERSONHOOD of the victim killed. As cited earlier, our Constitution says that "all persons are entitled to the EQUAL protections of our laws."In short, legalized abortions DENY the children killed by abortions, their 5th and 14th Amendment rights to the EQUAL protections of our laws by depriving them of their lives and their rights to the due process of our laws. My opponent(s) can claim that a human being in the fetal stage of their life is not 'child in the womb,' a 'human being' and or a 'person.' They can continue to believe that because abortions are 'legal' that they must also be 'lawful...'but can they deny the arrests & convictions under our Fetal Homicide Laws? The legal language of our Fetal Homicide Laws or the Supreme Court's refusal to overturn convictions?In our previous round, Con claimed that "the law does not recognize non-viable fetuses as people." He also provided a legal definition that defines murder as one person UNLAWFULLY killing another. I have shown my opponent the language of our Federal and State Fetal Homicide laws which not only define a 'child in the womb' as 'a human being' but they also make it a crime of murder to kill one in a criminal act. I have provided links to at least one case where a person has been charged with MURDER for tricking a woman into taking abortion drugs - to cause an abortion. There have been others [11] and there will be more. How many more MURDER convictions will it take for my opponent(s) to recognize the fact that abortions kill a child (person) in the womb? How many more MURDER convictions will it take for my opponent(s) to realize that laws which keep abortions legal deny those children aborted the equal protections of our laws? How many more children will be denied their rights and their lives by 'legalized abortions' before my opponent will realize that the abortions which killed them were UN-Constitutional and for that reason, unlawful. In the previous round, my opponent claimed that a child in the womb is not even 'murderable.' I have not only quoted the text of the law which proves that killing a 'child in the womb' CAN be an act of murder. I have also provided multiple links to cases where prosecutions have been made and the convictions upheld by our courts. Abortions are murders because the laws which permit them are Un-Constitutional and Unlawful. Please vote "PRO" if you agree that these arguments have prevailed over those of my opponent's. Thanks to all who vote. [1] Appeal to Authority - http://www.nizkor.org...[2] 18 U.S. Code § 1841 - http://www.law.cornell.edu...[3] 18 U.S. Code § 1111 - Murder http://www.law.cornell.edu...[4] 18 U.S. Code § 1112 - Manslaughter http://www.law.cornell.edu...[5] 18 U.S. Code § 1113 - Attempted Murder http://www.law.cornell.edu...[6] States Fetal Homicide Laws - http://www.ncsl.org...[7] Challenges to Fetal Homicide Laws - http://www.ncsl.org...[8] Kansas Abortion Murder - http://www.medicaldaily.com...[9] 5th Amendment - http://constitution.findlaw.com...[10] 14th Amendment - http://constitution.findlaw.com...[11] Abortion Murder - http://www.abcactionnews.com...