Abortion is wrong, but it should be soften in the case of a rape victim.

Thank you for the complement. This is my first debate as well, so let"s hope we both have a good "first experience." You state that abortion is not murder, because "often, abortion is performed within the first few months of pregnancy." Am I correct? If this is the case, I tend to disagree with you. From as early as the third week of pregnancy the fertilized egg inside of a woman starts to grow. The fertilized, the egg, now called a zygote, immediately closes its outer membrane to the rest of the 250 (on average) sperm that have made it this far, then it begins dividing into identical cells as it is swept down the Fallopian tube to the uterus, where it will continue to grow. (Website:http://www.babycentre.co.uk...) If this is now a growing thing, does it still mean it"s not living? You state: "I agree on your statement on rape victims getting privileged to this treatment, but we can't make other people give birth just because of opinions on moral rights," and I think you've made a valid point. I"d just like to add that it is not the opinion of moral rights, it is common sense. People have many other forms of contraception they can use to avoid getting pregnant. How is abortion justified when a person gets pregnant, willingly? You've made a contradiction in your argument by saying: "Abortion is often linked with murder, due to the fact that, yes, it is stopping a living organism." My question to this will then be when is abortion linked with murder in your opinion? As I stated above the fertilized egg is growing from as early as three weeks. In order for it not to be murder, you should have an abortion before that. Or I am wrong? Also, to what is your perception of life then? (Taken in context of this statement, when do you think a baby "becomes a living being"?) Also, according to you, when and/or when not, will abortion be linked to murder? By asking this question, I also need to understand what your understanding of murder is. Please elaborate this in your next argument. In your argument you state that "if you were trying to avoid the child in the first place, I believe that you should be able to get rid of a baby and not have to deal with giving the child to adoption, or even give birth in the first place" and I think this is a very cold way of thinking. I agree with you that sometimes people do not intend to get pregnant, but they do and as I stated above there are many different forms of contraception they could use, to avoid this. Also, wouldn't giving a child up for adoption be less traumatizing for a mother, when you know you've done the best you could to give a child a good home (if you are not ready to provide this yourself), rather than feeling guilt for the rest of your life for not granting a child a chance to live? You state that I "make it sound as if the baby knows he is being "betrayed" by his parents." By making this statement, do you feel that the baby is being betrayed? If so, then do you agree that this is a wrong act? To correct you, I didn't mean to "make it sound as if the baby knows he"s being "betrayed." I don"t think that babies to have an understanding of what is happening and I agree with your statement: "the growing baby does not have enough knowledge to think complexly like this, since that kind of thinking does not come until the baby, obviously, is some years older," but when having an abortion, you deprive a child from its right to live. You decide over the life of another human being and according to me this is murder.