Abortion should be illegal in the United States

"Life is life, whether it is within the womb or not. A single cell is "alive", meaning it meets the criteria for life (1). Whether or not a being is alive is not contingent upon whether or not its EEG waves are detectable. Obviously one would not be able to detect EEG waves on a single cell, but that does not mean it is not alive." Sorry, I should have clarified. I meant "alive" as in a human being. Although it may be "alive" in that is meets the scientific requirements for life, it is not considered a human being yet. As far as science is concerned, it is literally a clump of cells which has the potential to grow to become a human. Before that point in time, the fetus is not a person. It is only at 24-28 weeks that the fetus begins to be conscious of its own existence. Life is life, but life is not all equal. Most people would agree that an adult human has more of a right to life than a butterfly. Although it would certainly not be right for me to kill the butterfly simply because I "feel like it," if I were faced with the choice of saving another person's life or saving a butterfly's life, I would most likely choose to save the person. Although it is partly because the butterfly has a much shorter life span, the choice would largely be based on the fact that the person is a intelligent, thinking, feeling human. In other words, the person's life would be more "valuable" because it is simply more complex. Your argument is largely based on the assumption that abortion can be legally classified under murder. That by itself is debatable. Can a zygote even be considered a live "human"? Chromosomes do not determine whether or not something/something is "human." At conception, although we have the necessary instructions to eventually become people, we are not people. Most cells in the human body contain full sets of DNA. "A human zygote is not only composed of living cells, but *human* cells that reproduce and differentiate into *human* tissues, organs, and so on. Therefore it is both human and alive." My teeth are not only composed of living cells, but contain *human* cells which have the ability to reproduce and differentiate into *human* tissues. (Stem cells are found in dental pulp) But are my teeth human? No. They are teeth. And if I were to acquire an instruction manual for assembling a bicycle, would that manual alone determine whether or not the thing I am assembling is a bike? No. If I had the instruction manual, but I had only one screw from the potential bike, I could hardly call it a bike. If the bike were completed with all its parts assembled, would I be able to call it a bike? Of course. However, if the frame and wheels were completed with the seat missing, would it still be considered a bike? Possibly. Different people would have different opinions on what would pass as a bike. However, based on its functionality at stages of completion, the majority of people would be able to agree on a set of qualifications it has to meet before it can be considered an actual bike rather than a collection of bike parts. A human being has the ability to reason, and more importantly, to not only respond to stimuli, but to *feel* the stimuli. If a fetus (up until around 24 weeks) flinches, it is not because it feels pain; it is an instinctual reflex. It is not aware of its own existence. Abortion is not a traumatic experience for the fetus if done by the early second trimester. "There is a condition known as congenital analgesia in which the sufferer cannot feel pain (2). If someone were to kill them, would it be justifiable since they do not feel pain?" The unborn are comparable to those with congenital analgesia in that respect only. People with congenital analgesia have emotions and feelings that can have nothing to do with physical pain. And they have formed several emotional connections with the people around them. If one with congenital analgesia were to die, that one person would not be the only victim. All of his/her friends and family would suffer emotionally as well. On the other hand, a fetus is not even self-aware. After an abortion, only the mother, if anyone, would mourn for the the fetus on that personal level. "The definition of human rights is : "rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status." (3) Notice how the definition of human rights does not exclude unborn humans." The definition does not explicitly *exclude* any particular group. However, it does not *include* age as a "regardless of" factor. My point is, human rights are neither explicitly extended to nor explicitly kept from the unborn. Also, again, a zygote does not qualify as a human being just for the reasons you listed. "Yes, my stance is that an abortion should only be performed in the event that the mother's probability of death is high." As the Con, I understand that my goal is to show that abortion should be legal at least one case other than when the mother's life is at risk. My mother's family has a history of hard pregnancies. My mother had hyperemesis gravidarum, or severe morning sickness. For her, morning sickness did not stop until well into the second trimester. She threw up often, lost weight, and had to stop going to work. Evidence suggests that hyperemesis gravidarum is hereditary. If I were to get raped today, there is a 1/28 chance that I would get pregnant. If I did get pregnant right now at 14, I would abort the fetus. If abortion were illegal, I would possibly abort the fetus regardless, because if I didn't, chances are, I would get too sick to even go to school. I would have to drop out of school to carry an unwanted fetus for nine months, and possibly only to put the baby up for adoption once it is born. Currently, I have a fairly bright future. However, if I got pregnant right now and had to carry the fetus for nine months, my life would literally be ruined. A baby is not a gift for everyone. Yes, I am aware that rape accounts for only around 1% of abortions, but it does happen, and keep in mind that my goal is to simply find at least one instance in which the mother should not be forced to carry the fetus to full term. Also, would it really be practical to make abortion illegal? Although making it illegal would reduce the number of abortions people have, people would still get abortions. What would the punishment be? A fine? Women with family incomes below the federal poverty level ($18,530 for a family of three) account for more than 40% of all abortions. Jail time? Six in 10 American women having an abortion already have a child. What would sending the woman to jail do for her children? "Murder is murder and the definition should not be tainted by emotional circumstances or flimsy excuses. " That is an interesting take on the issue, but I think that, definitions aside, what we actually need is more empathy from all sides, and not just for this issue, either. This is an ethical issue that cannot be solved completely without emotions. Abortion is too complicated of an issue to throw a blanket statement over all of the cases. Most women who end up getting an abortion have multiple reasons. The very fact that there are intelligent people with intelligent and justified opinions on all sides of the issue (notice how I said "all", not "both") shows that abortion should neither be made completely illegal nor kept exactly as it is. SOURCES http://discovermagazine.com... http://www.scientificamerican.com... http://kidshealth.org...# http://www.johnstonsarchive.net... http://www.guttmacher.org... Thank you for a great first debate