Abortion should be legal

Abortion as murder A woman's body knows to dispel a fetus if it has any serious mutations that would prevent it from becoming a functional human being. This is why babies are never born without major organs, since the woman miscarries long before the fetus is carried to term. Abortion is thus something that is routinely practiced by natural biological processes in nature. Hence the argument that abortion is a living things fails because of nature. Considering what has been said, the logical conclusion is that abortion isn't murder. However the law is right when it says that if a man murders a pregnant woman then he should be charged with two murders. For the woman lost her opportunity to have a child. In this case fetus is like an unborn child which hasn't been born due to murder. However when abortion happens (naturally or not) then the fetus isn't like an unborn child hence its not a murder. In addition, Brian Elroy points out that the other distinctive feature of a "person" is what we know as "consciousness." In many ways, killing an animal for meat is more inhumane than ending the contingent life of a fetus because the fetus cannot feel pain at that point in its development but the animal can. Until my points are refuted, I correctly stand in the position of legalizing abortion. Now I present my reasons: The drive to ban ALL abortions is driven by the religious right. It is based on the believe that a human soul is created at the moment of conception. What moral prerogative would assume the right of the mother can be trumped by the 'rights' of an embryo. Within the first three months or trimester, we are talking about a mass of largely undifferentiated cells. The only reason one could even claim such an absurd sacrifice of the mother to this none human cell mass; is because of religious claim of soul intervention within those cells. Why do I use the word sacrifice. Because if a women are prevented from having an abortion because of government laws, then by definition she is no longer in ownership of her own body and her right to abort an embryo or indeed a fetus, is sacrificed to government intervention. Just because a woman becomes pregnant, does not mean that she has sacrificed the right to do with her own body what she so chooses and that includes having an abortion. The other argument apart from the religious claim of a soul being placed in the embryo at conception, is that to abort an embryo is to kill a human being. This is simply scientifically false. An embryo has no attributes by which one could define it as human. Thus, to call embryo destruction murder is about as absurd as it gets. The other claim often made is that of potentiality. An embryo has the potential to become human, therefore it should be granted rights based on potential possible future probabilities. If that was the standard, then by the same definition every male sperm is a potential human being and government laws should be passed to prevent male masturbation... because in doing so one is causing a holocaust of potential human beings. The aborting of fetuses as apposed to embryos, often brought up by pro-life demonstrators, is a 'red herring' argument. The fact is that most abortions are performed in the first trimester embryonic stage. When fetuses are aborted it is almost always because of a serious birth defect or because of complications that put the woman's life at risk.