Abortion should be illegal

Contention 1 (Opponent's 1-3): Fetus is alive With this being the finial round I would like to point out many key dropps before I end up continuing into this argument. First my opponent dropped my Scott Klusendorf, "Advanced Pro-Life Apologetics" argument and this is highly important as it shows that the value of a person does not change over time and hence the fetus is equal to QB Tom Brady and even some guy on his death bed. We can see that this is important to this debate under that circumstance, but there's more that my opponent has dropped. Another key argument that my opponent dropped was another round 2 argument on Self and Identity as Memory. Let me give you the quote again here, "In fact, philosophers often use the terms self and person interchangeably: a capacity for self-awareness is necessary for full personhood. " (. http://socrates.berkeley.edu...) Now I want you to pay close enough to the word person in that phrase. Last round my opponent goes on a tangent saying that humans and persons are two different things. Though he fails to refute this argument as I went on to show and my opponent CONCEDED that the fetus does indeed have self-awareness, because of that we can see that under Con's own definitions and tangent that the fetus is indeed a person and should be protected under law by his own standards. On the note of a personhood outside of what my opponent had dropped that I had brought up in my 1st round of arguing we can look to the the Supreme Court Ruling on Row V Wade which they ruled that Congress may define when life begins. ( . http://www.realcorygardner.com...) So with that Congress has the authority to define when the personhood begins though I have already proved it. Currently in Congress Senator Rand Paul has Life at Conception at which does exactly what it says and defines that life starts at conception proving that it is to be out lawed under the premise of it being against the 14th Amendment of the Constituion which states, " “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities ofcitizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, orproperty, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equalprotection of the laws. ”Here we can see that since I have proven that life begins at conception and that by US Constitutional Law that Abortion should be banned as it harms the individual. My opponent does agree and concede that the zygote is indeed alive which is a huge thing here in this debate and to further the disappointment is when Con goes on to argue that despite it being alive it's not an FDH, but if you remember correctly I brought up FDH in my 1st round and it was left unrefuted in my last round. This is when I showed that the fetus had the same FDH level of that of a person in a coma and that of a person who is asleep. This is key as we can see that despite what level of FDH a fetus or zygote has it still has the same level as a sleeping person or a person in a coma and legalizing this would mean that we can "abort" someone who's asleep, because their FDH level isn't good enough. For the first part it does not matter if he lets his religion get in his way as you'll find bias in everything you read and that's something that's unavoidable even if it's the same level of that of Fox News or MSNBC. Again I refuted this point showing that a fetus is a person due to a drop from my opponent in R1. Contention 2: After EffectsMy opponent does concede that it does cause a problem, but goes on to say that cigarettes are the same and are still legal, but let it be known that smoking cigarettes on a daily bases increase your risk for lung cancer by 90%. (. http://www.cdc.gov...) While on the contrary that I showed in my first round that a single abortion increases breast cancer risk up to 600% which dwarfs the cigaretts and is just down right dangerous and should be banned due to the harmful affects upon the mother. My opponent has also dropped my PASS argument so I extend that across the board. Contention 3: Life of the Mother My opponent states that the government has no buisness in the bedroom and that is incorrect when we apply the theories of Thomas Hobbes. He showed that the people needed to be protected more then their freedoms and no sex for some did help them out and helped the poor while protecting their health. We can see that their liberties, even under situations of rape and incest, DO NOT matter. "THE final cause, end, or design of men (who naturally love liberty, and dominion over others) in the introduction of that restraint upon themselves, in which we see them live in Commonwealths, is the foresight of their own preservation, and of a more contented life thereby; that is to say, of getting themselves out from that miserable condition of war which is necessarily consequent, as hath been shown, to the natural passions of men when there is no visible power to keep them in awe, and tie them by fear of punishment to the performance of their covenants. .. " (Leviathan, Part 2 by Thomas Hobbes)He states this above and later goes on to agree with my point in points 6, 11, and 12 of this section. In conclusion, we can see that this debate goes to Pro on the grounds that Con has dropped several key arguments including when I showed that a fetus was a person in Round 1 and other key round 1 arguments that were dropped. We can see that from these droppages alone that a fetus is indeed alive and a person. Thus abortion should be abolished.