Abortion

Thanks to the opponent for the response. I will also like to point out that the way the opponent wrote out the word rebuttal is incorrect. He wrote "rebuttle" this is sadly incorrect. Just wish to point that out to him for future references and for him not to commit the same mistake in future debates. ---- Rebuttals ----1. If I were to use this same logic then I would be able to shoot my 1-year old, just because it is in my house and I don't want it there. This example is extremely terrible and I will show how. There is a big difference when the fetus is inside the woman's body and when the fetus becomes a child and It's born into the United States then it becomes a citizen. A fetus is not considered a citizen ever since Roe vs. Wade case which I recommend the reader to do research on. Once that baby is born once that umbilical cord is cut, the baby has officially become a citizen of the United States and since then does he have rights. Also even though this baby can not speak out for his rights that is why the Government exist in the case, that the mother It's self like the opponent shows an example of kills or hurts the baby if the authorities find out they will make sure the child gets justice. I will repeat myself once again a fetus is not considered nor a baby, nor a child, nor a human being nor a citizen, until he/she is born.2. The fetus is a human being that lives in the U. S. and therefore should have rights. The baby/fetus should have the right to live. Also, my opponent asks what rights are pro-life people being denied? The we are not arguing for our rights because we are not as selfish as pro-choice people, we are arguing for the babie's rights. As for the mother's rights, she has the right to put that baby up for adoption. Obviously the opponent didn't go through my sources, because It's states clearly that ever since the Roe vs. Wade case fetus are not considered human beings nor citizens. They have no rights when it comes to the law of the united States. Wether the opponent is debating it should change, I am showing that it should stay the same. The opponent states that the fetus lives in the U. S. A. This is incorrect he lives in the womb of the mother. The mother lives in the United States and is a citizen of the country and has inalienable rights therefore his case is inaccurate. I believe It's sad that through my whole debate I never offended any type of people and their belief's yet the opponent believes people like me & the other 51% in this website are selfish but I will move on. The opponent uses all these words to describe fetus such as baby, human being, child which are all wrong. I will show the definition of these words and prove how they can not be used to describe a fetus. . http://www.law.cornell.edu...Baby: a very young child, one newly or recently born. Obviously the word baby can't be used to describe fetus since a fetus is not born yet. Human Being: a man, woman, or child of the species. Distinguished from other animals by superior mental development, power of articulate speech, and upright stance. Therefore a fetus can't be called a Human Being either, because doing so will be incorrect.3. My opponent again uses bad logic. He says we should not deny a woman the choice to kill her baby. If this true then the same example I gave in my first rebuttle can also be used here. A woman does not deserve the right to kill a baby, whether the baby is in or out of the woman's body is irelevant the woman has no control over the babie's life. The opponent states that I use bad logic, with my statement. Yet if he believes that It's relevant killing a born child and fetus then he is sadly mistaken. I've pointed out before that a born child has inalienable rights , a fetus does not. I will like to point out that the woman does have control over the body of the fetus, since she is the one suffering the pain of carrying a fetus. 4. This is the difference between giving choices and demanding. We can't force a woman in the United States to have only one child. Is their personal life and their personal choices, that would go against the democracy the United States so much stands for. So the answer the opponent states is not as easy as he makes it sound. But we can give woman the choice to have abortion's we do not demand it just give them the choice. Which is an essential part to the democracy that stands till this date in the United States. I will go in a bit further. Democracy: a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives. In a democratic society everyones voice is heard. The government listens to the voices of pro-life and pro-choice citizens and made the decision that to give It's citizens true democracy they had to legalize abortion, because if they didn't they would be depriving woman of their freedom of choice and freedom to live their personal life as they wish. ---- Rebuttals To Opponents Cases ----1. I feel like he's repeating himself and he's forcing me to do the same. The opponent states that he was wondering where the baby's rights are. Babies do have rights, fetus do not because they are not born therefore they are not citizens of the United States. The 14th amendment strictly states "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. " I will like to point out the word born! Fetus are not born to the United States therefore they are not considered citizens nor have rights. He wants to point that because them woman is a citizen of the United States it gives the baby rights, I ask this to the opponent what if it oh so happened that this woman suddenly leaves the country before the baby is born? What if the fetus is born dead? Just because the mother lives in the United States and is a citizen of the country it does not make the fetus a citizen.2. The opponent believes that killing should not be permitted in a civilized society. Then why are we killing thousands of men in Iran & Afghanistan? Does this justify killing, because we're doing it to "protect" our country? Let's get real. The opponent clearly keeps stating that fetus is a human being, can he show me evidence like I showed him?3. The opponent states that a woman has the choice of putting the fetus after it is born for adoption. This is true, but we can see clearly that this is a choice. A choice that if they do not want to comply with they do not have to. Wether the opponent likes it or not woman have the final choice on wether they want to bring a baby into this world. She doesn't have to put it up for adoption so you and all other pro-life citizens can feel morally accomplished. 4. This is always brought up for every debate on abortion. So I will put forward the same rebut I always put forward. Smoking causes cancer and kills, should we make it illegal? No we shouldn't because, people are aware that smoking causes cancer and is capable of killing but is the people's CHOICE. People are aware that abortion is harmful but they still want an abortion and we are no one to deny it.5. People will have to pay taxes either way wether abortion was legal or illegal. The government or states just uses these taxes now for abortion. His case is strictly invalid. ---- Conclusion ----In the United States people have freedom of choice and we shouldn't deprive them of that freedom to accommodate someone else's morals.