Abortion should be illegal

a man sign up to debate.org and then visits my profile and challenges me? still doubting him of challenging me for particular reason, anyway, not important.{parts written in Italic inside these brackets mean I am quoting my opponent}REBUTTAL:he was asked proof for fetus=human.he gave one reference from "National Geographic", I checked it and it was to be bought, hence I wasnt able to check it, however, since national geographic can be said neutral source, let us conclude: he proved. (I am not going to speak about other sources since this one is enough)PRO: {My opponent does not seem to understand what an abortion is. He asserts that an abortion is not killing the unborn, but that it is the cessation of help to the unborn.} indeed my opponent doesnt seem to understand me.I understand what abortion is. I didnt assert it.I never say that: unborn does not die after abortion. child dies "after/at" the time abortion happens,what I asserted is: it is not women who is killing that, when we have abortion we rescue ourself from burden&load&freight&e.t.c and it is the right of ours. it is right of woman to disconnect herself from fetus and it is right of doctors to help her to disconnect herself.PRO: {All of these methods are a direct attack on the unborn and not a simple denial of aid.}all of these methods can be direct attack on the unborn but it doesnt change that it is denial of aid. do we have right to force somebody in order to save anotherone from an attack? no, we dont have that right.PRO: {My opponent appears to claim that a natural and necessary process for the continuation of the species constitutes a cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.}I did not claim that process for the continuation constitutes a cruelness, inhuman&degrading treatment.what I claimed is: to force somebody to do something constitutes cruelness. when we force woman to have pregnancy is cruelty, not to allow her freedom is cruelty.however, to force somebody "to carry it 7-9 months, have a great suffer for bearing it" is more than that. yes, it is cruelness.I am not claiming every pregnancy/birth is cruelness, if a woman does it with her will, I wont say anything.PRO seems to have misunderstood me, I deduced it when I read these: {Biologically speaking, on a physical level, the fundamental purpose of every member of any species is the propagation of its own genes and of the species. As such, pregnancy cannot be construed as fundamentally cruel, inhuman, or degrading.}I didnt say that pregnancy is cruelness/inhumanity. where did you deduce it from?but not allowing woman who wants to avoid this burden is cruelty, torture and inhumanity.and then he went on talking about conditions.1){If all humans are equal, logically the age of that human does not matter.}equality of all humans doesnt give us right to force somebody/woman to do something.it doesnt give us to prevent somebody from avoiding something..2) {Only 15%-25% of those studied had abortions.Of those who had abortions most said it was pressure from boyfriends, family, etc. that caused them to have the abortion.}it doesnt mean that 100% of raped pregnants indeed didnot want to have abortion.may be there are women who had abortion due to pressure from his environment, it doesnt mean that there's no any rapedn who wants abortion with own will. there may still be women who want abortion with their own will.PRO: {The stigma is on the woman as to what she did to invite being raped.}isnt it fallacy? if I rape somebody, the culpable one is the woman I raped, because she did to invite being raped. almost every crimer can be defended with this logic: if I kill somebody, The stigma is on the one I killed as to what she/he did to invite being killed.even, when we have abortion, The stigma is on the fetus as to what she/he did to invite being aborted.what kind of logic is this?PRO: {It is often those around her who want the “problem” to be gone so that they can pretend it never happened.}by using this logic: I may rape every girl I am around of because I am the one around her who wanted the problem to be gone. it does not make raping right, nor makes it justified.PRO: {In fact many women reported that the abortion felt like a medical rape}it doesnt mean there is no raped pregnant who wants abortion, there may till be woman who wants to avoid it.2)B):{an innocent third party cannot legally be held responsible for the unintended consequences of the first and second party}in the same way, a woman who wants to avoid can not legally be held responsible for the vulnerability of a fetus.3) {Once again the unborn child is an innocent third party who cannot be held responsible for the actions of others.}a woman can not be held responsible for the vulnerability of a fetus. if fetus dies due to disconnection, that is not our problem, woman has right not to help fetus to survive.4) {We hold parents as guardians responsible for the care of their children, regardless of financial circumstances.}who are you? we are not compulsory to live according toyou..if one does not want to spend money forsomething, that is his right not to spend{Parents of a newborn would be thrown in jail for dismembering an infant because they thought it was too expensive to take care of.}what codex has such rule?{A woman is equipped by nature with all she need to feed a child.}it does not end with feeding, however woman is not equipped by nature, woman needs to eat, to eat she needs to buy/spend moeny.{If the parents feel the financial burden will be too great, they can put the child up for adoption.}what can they do till birth? in order this arguement to be sensical, till birth government needs to meet the woman till the birth.5){So the basics of your argument is that the government should enable a girl to kill her child} girl is not killing her child, she is rescuing herself, more: she quits feeding the child, not killing her..{instead of changing laws and enforcement to prevent the murder of that girl}that is tradition cant be changed by government at once. this is logical fallacy.to prevent the murder, government needs to watch her 9 months 24 hours because government can not know who&how will kill her.the government can act in case girl explains that she may/wil be killed if her pregnancy gets known, but there may be a girl who wants to abort without complainin.it may be humiliation for her&family, the government can not prevent the girl from being humiliated, to avoid humiliation girl wants abortion.6){ I would not be permitted to kill an older human being with the same ailment.} older man lives in his own when he is struggling with ailment but the fetus doesnt, he is being protected by woman and the woman doesnt want to protect ill childhowever, you'dnt be permitted to kill but we are not asking to kill the child when we have abortion,we are asking to stop the help we give and that is our right.{since the child is a human being, what right do you have to kill that child?}I sincerely admit that I have no right to kill that child or anybody, BUT ANY PERSON HAS RIGHT NOT TO HELP THAT CHILD. if he dies without my help, that is not my problem.{Nobody is more vulnerable or has less of a voice than the unborn who cannot be seen or heard.}again, woman can not be held responsible for vulnerability of fetus.whatt right do you have to force women to help to vulnerable one?rich man arguement: that is not falsen, both help somebody to survive and both stop the help they give.p.s:this is an arguuement of a russian comunist from 80's, I wanted to give citation but didnt find it on internet, so incase you find it dont accuse me of plagirising.MY ARGUEMENTS:1)The World Health Organization estimated in 2006 that "back-alley" abortions cause 68,000 maternal deaths each year in countries where abortion is not legal.[1] do you want this numbers to increase? then, support abortion to be made illegal.2)additional to CONDITION6 abortion is less risky than birth for the health of woman. "The risk of a woman’s death from abortion is less than one in 100,000,[3] whereas the risk of a woman dying from giving birth is 13.3 deaths per 100,000 pregnancies."[4] this means: when we dont allow woman for abortion under health condition, we put him under bigger risk. 3)if you read "advantage 1&2" from previous round, you know that I claimed illegality of abortion increases crime and corruption, if we make abortion legal this will reduce it. "Some estimates claim legalized abortion accounted for as much as 50% of the drop in murder, property crime, and violent crime between 1973 and 2001." [5] but if antiabortionists want this rate to increase again, then you have a chance, ask abortion to be made illegal.4) woman has the right to decide whether the foetus remains in her body. basic rights and logic: every human being has the right to own their body a foetus is part of a woman's body and women are humans, not container or machine for fetus therefore that woman has the right to abort a foetus they are carrying if you wan to keep that alive, then that is you problem, if you so want, invite something which can keep fetus alive. and, if you see women as container or machine for fetus, ask abortion to be made illegal.5)I presented 6 conditions in previous round which were replied by my opponent in this one, but I replied him in this round and I can say that that 6 conditions are still valid arguements. in general, it is up to readers.I could write on but I almost reached limit.REFERENCES: [1]David A Grimes, MD, et al., "Unsafe Abortion: The Preventable Pandemic," Lancet, Oct. 2006[3] The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, "Induced Abortion," www.acog.org, Nov. 2008[4] Amnesty International, "Deadly Delivery: The Maternal Health Care Crisis in the USA," www.amnesty.org, 2010[5] John J. Donohue, PhD, and Steven D. Levitt, JD, PhD, "The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 2001