Abortion on Demand Should Be Illegal

Cakerman, thank you for your reply. I will begin by examining the issue of when life begins. I will then move on to explain what I believe to be the logical implications. I intend to show that at the moment of conception, a brand new living human person is created. It has been my experience that those who are pro-choice tend to flip-flop all over the place when they are asked to give a standard for when a fetus becomes a living human person. I ask you, cakerman, to establish a particular set of criteria so that, when all of these criteria are met, the fetus becomes a living human person with the right not to die. I ask you to include all criteria that you think are relevant to deciding if it is a human life so that you don't have to add on any more criteria later on in the debate. For example, if you agree that a fetus is a living human person after it is both viable and has a heartbeat, then please do not add another criterion of brain activity later on. State all the criteria that you intend to use right off the bat. I believe a fetus is a living human person at conception. It is human because it has a 100% human genetic code, the only objective way of determining species. Secondly, it is living because every functioning cell in our body is living according to the 7 characteristics that scientists use to determine life. Thirdly, I believe it should be counted as a person because any other point is automatically inconsistent. I will analyze those points when you provide your criteria for when the fetus becomes a person. If the fetus is a living human person at that point, then killing it would be just as terrible as killing any other living human persons. Killing it would be a homicide. Obviously, illegalizing abortion would cause more unsafe abortions that could endanger the mothers. My answer is rather blunt: I care about the child's life, but if a mother tries to kill her child, she ought to die. This pro-choice argument is so fallacious. It would be like saying if we make raping children illegal, then child rapists might get hurt in the process. Of course, they will get hurt in the process as they should if they are committing such an evil act. If an abortion is a murder, we don't want mothers to be safe when killing their children. The only sad part is that the fetus would die in the process, but that would have happened anyway if abortion were legal. While I do not believe some person's rights should trump the same rights of another, I do believe some rights are inherently more valuable. For example, my right not to be murdered by you is greater than your right to do whatever you want with your body. Similarly, in the case of the pregnant mother, the mother's right of convenience is less than the child's right not to be murdered. Remeber, this is about abortion on demand, so we are not talking about rape, incest, or the safety of the mother. You could imagine a case in which contraception fails, but the mother still bears responsibility for her child. All contraception has a risk, and by engaging in sex, you automatically are responsible for those risks and responsibilities. You can't simply murder another person because it didn't work out. The baby, if it is a living human person, has the simple human right of not being killed. "There are laws put in place that say that no one can use your organs or blood, regardless if you are dead or living, and regardless of how many people it would benefit or even save. " There are several problems with this. First, this obviously doesn't apply to pregnant mothers, otherwise, pregnancy would be illegal. Secondly, even if the law makes something legal, it does not mean it is morally okay. Abortion is also legal, but it is not morally okay. We are arguing philosophically and scientifically what ought to be, not what law is. It seems to me we have four possibilities when it comes to abortion. 1) It is a life, and you know it. 2) It is a life, and you don't know it. 3) It is not a life, and you know it. 4) It is not a life, and you don't know it. The first case should be illegal because that is 1st-degree murder. The second case should be outlawed because that would be manslaughter. The third case is actually the only one that is legally and morally justifiable. Therefore, if abortion on demand should be legal, my opponent had the burden of demonstrating that a fetus is not a life and we can certainly know that. If it even could be a life, it should not be killed. Lastly, I would like to point out that the greatest evils in the history of mankind have occurred because people have decided who and who is not a human based on personal convenience. Slaveholders said black people were not human so that they could have slaves. Nazis said Jews were not human so that they could kill them, and mothers say their children are not human so that they can kill their child. Anyone who calls their own child a burden and wants to kill it should bring tears to our eyes. We are witnessing the greatest Holocaust the world has ever seen.