Abortion is murder and should be illegal

I have made no attempt to degrade life, nor have I attempted to equate human beings with animals. My goal in that regard was to specify your point for you because you didn't bother: "life" is not the important concept in a debate about abortion. The contentious concepts are personhood and murder. Pro has also implied that I believe a fetus is not human. However, that is manifestly untrue. A fetus is the result of a coupling between two human individuals and has human DNA. It is indeed human, and I never said differently. That does not make it a person, however. Personhood is more inclusive than simply having human DNA. It is an extremely hard concept to delineate. Generally, personhood or humanity in a more metaphysical sense is defined in relation to rationality. There are degrees of cognition that are accorded degrees of rights. For example, a psychopath is not considered fully "human"- a person- even though they indeed possess a full complement of human DNA. Those with IQs of under 75 are denied some freedoms granted to those with normal IQs because of their decreased cognitive abilities. A fetus, almost completely lacking in cognition beyond base perception, would not qualify for personhood at all. The cognitive development of a fetus is certainly no better than that of a cow, and yet killing cows is not considered murder[1] . Even if you wish to equate personhood and humanity however, you still have a problem. Not all killing of persons is considered unjustified. For example, self defense is clearly a legitimate reason to kill someone. I am offering the utter and complete dependence of the fetus on the body of the mother as justification for her legal ability to kill it. This is only an option because it is the only method by which she can remove the parasite from her body. Assume for a moment that you were in a car accident. You wake up in the hospital and there are tubes coming out of you, your blood being taken and used by the man in the next bed before it is returned to you. He was another victim in the accident (neither of you were at fault). Say the doctor tells you- you have no choice but to allow this man to feed off you for the next nine months. If you do not allow this to happen, he will die. No one else can perform this service for him (no one else's blood is compatible for the purposes of this example). Would you then think that man's existence and utter dependence on you a legitimate means to your enslavement? He is a stranger who's existence and dependence you never intentionally brought about. He is utterly and completely helpless. And you have no desire to help him. Is choosing not to help him really murder? Would you allow this man to be tied to you for nine months, to your great inconvenience and quite possibly ill health, simply because some strange twist of fate has occurred that makes your action the only action that can sustain his life? You were not consulted before this occurred, your personal desires were not ascertained, your intentional behaviors did nothing to bring about this parasite's existence and dependence upon you. And yet, here he is. The mere existence of a dependent being trumps all your desires, all your freedom of action in regard to your own body. This is wrong. It is not murder to go about your business refusing to host a parasite, even if that parasite is human in some sense. Having sex is not a form of "consent" for pregnancy. Not all sex is consensual, so you are condemning rape victims to carry the spawn of their attackers to term. Also, birth control isn't 100% effective. Even if one uses a condom (properly) every time they have sex, there is still a small chance that they will become pregnant. Having gone to great length to avoid pregnancy, it doesn't follow that an individual should have to put up with such parasitism when they accidentally contract it. And I have reached my character limit 1. http://brainmind.com...