Abortion should be kept legal

"First off, before the debate begins, Abortion is a tricky issue, which many have strong opinions about and please vote on how has the best arguements." I agree with the above. Let me also add that "abortion" is a broad term that can mean many things to many diffrent people. When I am debating abortion - I am talking about elective abortion before the stage of viability - 90 + percent of the time which occurs before the 12th week of pregnancy in the first tri-mester. "First off the main issue here is why abortion, should not be legal. Now I do agree that it can be seen as a moral issue, but you must understand, one thing, it is taking another life. Why do Republicans say no to abortions, yet say yes to the death Penalty, why is it the inverse for Democrats. I believe that no life should ever be taken. " Yes, but the life of a fetus or embryo is not the same as the life of a fully grown person or the life of a baby or child...so it doesn't nessicarly have the same value. An embryo or fetus is alive on a CELLULAR level only. An embryo or fetus has no human charterisits (at the time where elective abortion occurs - 90 + percent of the time which is in the first trimester before the 12th week of gestation). An embryo or fetus has no ability to think, no ability to feel, no ability to "want" (to be born or to "die"). The truth is that an ambryo or fetus is NEVER guarintee'd to turn into a "baby" at ANY point in ANY pregnancy. Plenty of perfectly healthy and fully viabile pregnancy's end in still birth after a healthy pregnancy and normal birth. An embryo or fetus has cellular life but only the POTENTIAL to become a human life. What an embryo or fetus MIGHT become in the future is a moot point when arguing abortion - because an embryo or fetus is NEVER guarintee'd to become a baby - and an embryo or fetus is NOT a baby at the time of abortion. Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges. And saying that no life should "ever" be taken is a bit simplistic and nieve isin't it....after all there are times when it is perfectly acceptable in this society and others to take the life of others - in defense of ones self or ones child, when taking a loved one off of life support, exc. And I think you make the assumption that all "killing" is equally as "bad"...when the legal system shows us this is not the case. After all there are DEGREE'S of murder, and not ALL killing IS murder. Some killing (of other human beings) is NOT murder and is a lesser offense or not an offense at all. Things aren't as black and white as "life good death bad". "1. reason why you are taking a human being, that has a life." Well I wouldn't call an embryo a "human being". An embryo is an embryo. Lets not get ahead of ourselves here. An embryo COULD become a human being...the same way a sperm could become a human being...but millions of sperm die a minute...and I doubt your agianst masterbation because it kills living organisms with human DNA and cellular life. I don't disagree that an embryo is a organism with human dna that is alive on a cellular level - but I STRONGLY disagree that an embryo or fetus is a "human being". And how exactly does an embryo or fetus "have a life"? An embryo or fetus doesn't know it exists. It can not comprehend its own existence because it can not think...so how can it "have a life"? An embryo has NOTHING and looses NOTHING when aborted. An embryo or fetus is 100 percent incapable of thought, emotion, or feeling of any sort (it lacks the brain development required for those things). When I think of someone who "has a life" I don't think of a mass of cells completley incapable of knowing it lives or experiencing life at all. Please explain. "Two you can easily put this child into a adoption agency, which by the way is successful everywhere." 1. Adoption is a parenting choice. Abortion is a gestational choice. If a woman does not want to be or can not be pregnant - then adoption is a moot point...as it REQUIRES pregnancy and childbirth. Abortion prevents pregnancy and childbirth so the two are not compatable. 2. A fetus is not a child(medically or legally). A child exists only after birth - at which point the issue of abortion becomes moot as the CHILD is already born and alive and can't be aborted. 3. Adoption is not sunshine and lollypops nor is it "easy". Why would you assume adoption is "easy"? I assume you are a man and will never experience childbirth or pregnancy so you will not understand how hard it is emotionally to gestate, birth, and then hand over YOUR son or daughter to strangers never to be seen agian. Adoption is NOT a cure all solution - and it certinially is NOT the right choice for EVERY woman who has ever or will ever experience an unplanned pregnancy. You also forget that there is mostly a demand in this country for WHITE baby's who are HEALTHY. The majority of women who seek abortion are of a MINORITY race. What about people who abort for health reasons? Downs syndrom or TRI 13. Those babies would likley never be adopted. They would be sent to institutions to spend the rest of thier years in misery. The majority of children who would be born should abortion become illegal would NOT be easily adoptable as there is not a high demand for those children. Many would be placed in foster care. Adoption agency's now - with the small number of AA/minority children placed for infant adoption(diffrent from foster care) - have to reduce fee's (by sevral thousands of dollars - almost like a "sale") to find AA and minority race babies homes. 4. adoption agency's are NOT "succesful everywhere" do your research buddy. The adoption industry is in a state of chaos. 5. Women are not broodmares for the infertile. They are people with lives and minds. "Third, yes a woman has control of her body," I agree...and a fetus is a part of a womans body...being that it is attached to her uterous and all...and that it takes nutrients from her body and puts her at RISK of physical health complications (gestational diabeties for exp is common in healthy pregnancy's and can be perminant after birth)and mental illness (PPD). There are HEALTH RISKS...including the risk of DEATH...in pregnancy. The government should NOT be allowed to FORCE a woman into those RISKS agianst her will and with out her consent. "But woman hold other people with them at some points," What does that mean? Women hold other people with them? "Other people" aren't sucking nutrients from thier bodies - putting a strain on thier vital organs - and putting thier health and welfare - maybe even thier ability to work and support thier families - at risk. Being with someone - and having someone live off of your body as a life support machine are VERY diffrent. Do you expect women to also give kidney's or blood or bone marrow to keep someone else alive with out thier consent? If women should be forced into life support machines for fetuses - why not be forced into life support machines for people too? "why should a teenager or a naive person or even a rape victim, take a life, that has already began." There is no scientific agreement on when life begins...that is pure speculation...oppinion. YOUR oppinion should have ZERO effect on the ability of others to make health care choices for themselves. And the answer to your question is...because they want to and have the right to. "t is unjust, for someone to stand here and tell me that taking a life is just, because a woman has control of her body. We all know that isn't true, even with the example Britney Spears. A vote for the Neg is a vote for giving a voice to those who don't have one. A vote for the Aff is a vote for silencing that voice forever." What are you talking about...britney spears? I don't fallow at all. And it has ALREADY been determined by the legal system that abortion is NOT unjust....but that FROCED childbirth (like rape) is what is truly unjust.