Abortion Should Remain Legal

Round 2: Should abortion be legal in the U. S. A. ?Definitely not. U. S. ConstitutionLife, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. .. These are noble goals that have outlined our chase for the concept of freedom since Day 1 of the United States. My opponent speculates that, by taking away the option of abortion, we would be taking away a woman's right to pursue happiness. He defends this point by claiming, "I have no right to claim that any life is less valuable than any other, but for the sake of the Constitution. .. etc. ". It seems that my opponent has taken the vague idea of "general welfare" and placed it higher than the 14th Amendment (which he kind of referred to, but apparently isn't too familiar with). The 14th Amendment states:All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. The word that the 14th Amendment uses is "Person". It also states that no law shall be made to deprive any person of their life or their liberty. Yet my opponent believes that the preamble saying the Constitution is designed (no specific guideline, just stating the goal of the Constitution) to promote the general welfare proves that abortion is justified. Perhaps he will find support for his argument somewhere. .. but America was not designed to support the wrongful killing of children, so he will have no such luck with the Constitution. On a side note, referring to Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama as "some of our greatest leaders" made me laugh. My opponent, I understand, is one of many who actually support this man. I am one of many who do not. I would urge my opponent to keep in mind that I am not persuaded by the opinions of Barack Obama. I could quote Bush, couldn't I? Yes. The point of quotes is to use opinions from people who are mutually respected, and even then, they're not worth much in a debate round. Modern LawI do not believe we are discussing the moral conflict yet. However, I will respond to this point. The fact that abortion is legal doesn't mean it should stay legal. My opponent is using circular logic. If we were to outlaw abortion, then it would stand as murder in 50 states. My opponent seeks to use the status quo as a fallback. However, we are debating whether the status quo is correct ("Murder. .. er . .. abortion should remain legal. "), are we not? Modern law is not an acceptable justification for abortion. Supreme Courts and ScienceI can not argue against my opponent stating that the supreme court ruled something. However, obviously we are trying to find if that ruling was just. The ruling itself isn't support for the ruling. As for the science, I believe my opponent is mistaken. I am going to directly quote another website. I will provide the link below. As soon as a man's sperm penetrates the woman's egg, a new entity comes into existence. "Zygote" is its name. The zygote is composed of human DNA and other human molecules, so its nature is undeniably human and not some other species. The zygote has a genetic composition that is completely unique from any other human being, including its mother. (This disproves the "it's a woman and her body" argument. ) This DNA includes a complete design, guiding both early development and even hereditary attributes that will appear in later life, from hair and eye color to personality traits. It is also quite clear that the zygote is biologically alive. It fulfills the four criteria needed to establish biological life: metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction. Finally, scientists define an organism as a complex structure of interdependent elements constituted to carry on the activities of life by separately-functioning but mutually dependant organs. The human zygote meets this definition. Once formed, it initiates a complex sequence of events to prepare it for continued development and growth: The zygote acts immediately to initiate a program of development that will, if uninterrupted by accident, disease, or external intervention, proceed seamlessly through formation of the definitive body, birth, childhood, adolescence, maturity, and aging, ending with death. This behavior is the very hallmark of an organism. By contrast, while a mere collection of human cells may carry on the activities of cellular life, it will not exhibit coordinated interactions directed towards a higher level of organization. The scientific evidence is there: at the moment of fusion of human sperm and egg, a new entity comes into existence which is distinctly human, alive, and an individual organism - a living, and fully human, being. . http://www.frc.org...If this is the case, which I don't see how Pro can refute scientific evidence. .. well. .. then we've made a grave mistake in legalizing abortion as a country. ConclusionMy opponent finished his speech with a simple question, "Who am I to control someone else's life? ". The answer, as you may have already guessed, is this. I am no one, but a simple human being. But that child is just as much of a human as you or I. Who is anyone to control someone else's life? Thank you.