Abortion is generally immoral

As I have just had this same debate, my opening argument will be the same. Once Cliff replies, my rebuttals will be unique to his argument. -Opening Argument-I will give my argument in the form of a syllogism:P1: The unborn are members of humanity from fertilization until natural death. P2: All humans have an inherent right to life. P3: It is wrong to kill an innocent human. C1: Therefore, the unborn have an inherent right to life. C2: And it is wrong to kill an innocent unborn human. Premise 1: The unborn are members of humanity from fertilization until natural death. Biologically, we are humans at every stage of development. It would be incorrect to state that a human fetus grew up to be me. What is more correct is that I was actually once a human fetus (and embryo, and zygote, etc. ). We have human parents, and every living thing reproduces after its own kind (dogs have dogs, cats have cats, humans have humans). We also have human DNA. At all stages of development we are human, and therefore deserving of having our most basic right, the right to life, protected. Common pro-choice counter arguments generally fall into one of four categories: Size, Level of development, Environment, and Degree of dependency. I will briefly address these:Size -- The unborn are smaller than we are. Men are also generally bigger than women, yet they are not more valuable or deserving of more rights than women are. Size is no qualification for personhood. That's what we call bullying. Level of development -- The unborn are less developed than we are. Toddlers are also less developed than adults, yet they still have the same right to live adults do. Environment -- The unborn are not less valuable due to where they reside. I have been to Italy, yet the person I was did not change. I was the same person there as I am here. Simply being in the womb does not make one any less of a human or less deserving of rights. Degree of dependency -- The unborn are dependent upon the mother to live, but so are toddlers and infants. Simply being dependent does not make one more or less valuable. Everyone is dependent on something. Adults are dependent on their jobs to survive. Premises 2 and 3: All humans have an inherent right to life and it is wrong to kill an innocent human. Humans are inherently valuable. Every human has the inherent right to live. "Person" is simply a legal term that allows legal discrimination. Africans were once discriminated against and made as slaves. Women were once discriminated against and viewed as property. Neither African-Americans nor women were allowed to vote at one point in our nation's past. The Jews were discriminated against during the Holocaust. Our world is filled with discrimination (and note, I'm not comparing abortionists or women who get abortions to Nazis, this is merely to illustrate the discrimination that has gone on in the world). The unborn are still discriminated against and killed through the act of abortion. They are innocent because they have no yet committed a crime, and certainly not one deserving of death. Conclusions 1 and 2: Therefore, the unborn have an inherent right to life, and it is wrong to kill an innocent unborn human. As members of humanity, the unborn have an inherent right to life and they have not committed any acts of wrong. Simply existing is not a crime, and certainly not punishable by death. -Conclusion-I have adequately shown in my arguments why the unborn are valuable and deserving of protection. If the unborn are innocent, then killing them is prima facie wrong. In fact, we treat convicted criminals better than the youngest members of our own species.