Abortion

I would just like to say that this is it. The last argument in the last round. The pressure falls to me. I will try to explain this in as many ways as possible: abortion is just as bad as killing the baby after birth. You can justify this however you want, but it won't make it right. Point 1: Dependence on Mothers In your last argument, you failed to talk about my argument for dependence very much at all. After simply restating your previous argument, you say that a senior is different from a baby in that it grew a brain, arms, and legs. So, if a human ever had arms and legs, it's not okay to kill them. Those born without arms or legs are just...... unfortunate. Of course, I am not talking about the brain. But is the brain really the part of the body that makes you human? All animals have brains, and they aren't human. Are brains what make us alive? True, without a brain, we die, but we would also die without a heart. As I said earlier, artificial hearts are now available. And the idea that we can't live without a brain would be completely wrong if we proved that unborn babies were alive. So read on. You say that I subconsciously reject the fact that a fetus is truly complete between the 22nd and 24th week. Of course, this goes with what I'm saying, so why would I reject it? Abortions can happen later than that and they have, so you're saying that this would be wrong. You say that the baby has not "consolidated its brain." As I said before, a brain does not make a human alive or even human. A brain is simply another part of the body. Now, I know that some people will argue that the brain is essential for the mind, and the mind is what makes a human, or any creature, alive. But I argue that a brain is not essential to the mind. Nobody knows how the mind, or indeed the spirit or any other non-material part of a person, works. All we know is that the brain is the gateway to the mind. Sure, that sounds pretty essential. But killing the baby before that brain forms is just removing the mind before it has a chance to act through the body. We do not know anything about the mind or spirit (both said to be essential to life), so we cannot know whether killing the baby before 22-24 weeks actually kills the mind or spirit. We should not dabble in such things before we know more about it. Some may say that there is no mind or spirit, and we are just pointless machines, pre-coded to do certain tasks. You may also believe that there is no God, and so it would be illogical to say there is anything but the body. While I would love to argue the existence of God, this isn't the time nor place. Back on the topic of the mind existing, we could not do all the things we do if it weren't for something else. No matter how complex our DNA is (which is rather odd it formed completely out of primordial sludge), how can it explain things like rock-and-roll? How can it explain fashion? (Not the aspect of fashion that tempts the body by suggestion of intercourse, the obsession of matching colors and patterns to look pleasing.) There is a mind, and you can't simply take its body away because it's not yet ready. You say by my logic, "A sperm can still be classified as an unborn male according to Con's logic." You go so far as to say that I am suggesting sperm to be equivalent to you or me. I am not. I am saying the combining of sperm and egg, given a short amount of time (some say 24 hours, but I suggest no more than a couple days), leads to the creation of a human being. A human being is not something you can just kill because it bothers you. That is not okay in today's day and age. Point 2: The Mind (one I already made) You say abortion is illegal after eight weeks. States decide when it's illegal, and it ranges from eight weeks to, well, never. For example, the state of Montana might say after eight weeks it's illegal, but my home state of Oregon says whenever's fine. You say the only way I could win is "uncertainty." Yes, it is. Like Russian Roulette, I say that there might be a slight chance that you may kill a baby. Or wait, do I? My argument is that we know nothing about the mind and we should leave guesswork out of it. We as humans know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the mind. We can't just perform brain surgery by poking the brain with a stick and hoping we hit the problem instead of something vital. WE CANNOT KILL A BABY AND JUST HOPE IT WASN'T ALIVE YET. Point 3: Inconvenience and its relation to the killing of babies. Pro argues that having babies being born is expensive. It could cost 15000 dollars to have a c-section. But not all births are c-sections, and not all c-sections are expensive. Remember that abortion itself can cost up to 1500 dollars. That's three month's worth of food. The thing about planned parenthood is that it gets money from the government AND the people needing the services it provides (mainly abortions). It could last without tax dollars. If we use those tax dollars to make birth less expensive than abortion, more women would give birth instead of killing the baby. Alternate logic: Religious Lots of churches (or synagogues, temples, and the like) look down on abortion, but why? It is because in practically all religions, murder is bad. Heck, in atheism, murder is bad. The holy people of the world look down on abortion simply because it is killing the innocent baby before birth. Since many religions feature ideas about the soul, the baby is not seen as a human-to-be, it is seen as the husk of a soul that isn't fully formed. I will admit proudly that I enjoy being religious, but don't think less of my argument for it. Conclusion: I hope what I've said will let me win this debate. No, my whole argument does not rely on potential. It is almost the opposite, saying that the unborn baby (or fetus) has just as much right to live as the born baby. Sperm do not have brains, but that is not why sperm do not have the same rights as us. Sperm are not a human being, they are a component to a human being. Sugar does not sell for as much as a cake, and sperm don't have the rights of a baby. My worldview would not ban masturbation, although there are better uses for your time. We did not all start out out as sperm, seeing as that is only half of what we were made of. Take my arguments and defend the innocent baby, even if his father is not. No, my arguments don't deconstruct themselves, they stand together, a chain of logic stopping the murder of innocents. If a baby isn't yet born, why should we kill him? Is that the only excuse? Please, vote for those who could've lived. Vote Pro Life. (Abortion is anti-life. Life is precious. Ending it is a terrible act of violence.)