Abortion Is *WRONG*

Ok, so to start.... I will show how my opponent has granted me the win in this debate..... "..Once again after the first couple weeks it is alive with a heartbeat so yess it would be killing it." --My opponent states that only after the first couple weeks does it have a heartbeat and is it alive. So in the first couple weeks, before a heart has formed, under my opponents own definition mind you, abortion is ok. My opponent dropped my argument that he must prove that abortion is wrong in every single instance possible. Thus, he agrees with it. So abortion is ok before the heart has formed. In addition to that.......... "So far you have given two pros to abortion whereas i have give multiple. you are trying to prove my responses wrong but you arent giving proof for your argument." --My opponent also states that there are 2 pros for abortion. Again, he must prove that abortion can never be justified, and he said that there 2 good things about abortion, that is 2 reasons to vote for me as he has conceded that abortion is ok for 2 reasons. So add that to my earlier one, and you have 3 reasons that my opponent has stated that abortion isn't wrong.... With that.... lets go back to debating.... Ok, so his first 2 paragraphs deal with the ethics of abortion.... and he states that the baby (now fetus i guess) should have a chance at life. Ignoring the fact that the fetus doenst become a fetus until 8 weeks have passed.... My opponent is seeming to argue that because it has a working heart, it deserves to live. However, my opponent simply misses the fact that a heart beat alone cannot define life. There has to be a certain level of consciousness that occurs to really live. simply having a heart beat does not cut it. For example, why should someone who cant do ANYTHING, but does have a heartbeat, consume the things that actual living people, who can do things deserve. Why should they get it and let the rest of the people starve? I would call that unethical, so simply having a heartbeat doesnt cut it. Also with this, there are 2 'humans' involved in this. The fetus, and the woman. Why should the woman go through all that trouble for something she doesn't want? One can't argue that she isn't living and doesn't deserve anything. Not to mention, the baby when born, will probably be worse off if the mother doesn't want it. He may bring up the option of adoption, however he has failed to bring up any evidence supporting his claim. So basically, the fetus deserves a chance, but the woman doesn't deserve what she wants. You can extend these arguments for his 3rd paragraph too... "ok the correct term is post abortion stress syndrome and almost all women that have abortions go through this some is worse then others. and they think they can handle it they tell themselves that they can do it. and they cant" --Ok, again I am sitting here waiting for evidence to support this claim.... He has brought up no numbers at all. And the burden of proof rests with him as this is his argument. "You brought up the famous "rape" excuse so your saying because a woman was raped and concieved that it is ok to commit murder and murder is defined as "kill intentionally and with premeditation" and once again it is living with a heartbeat so it is intentonal and pemeditated. and once again just adobt it is much better then taking a life." --So my opponent uses law definitions here to define murder, however he fails to realize that the law agrees with me on this issue. Abortion is legal now, and they don't define it as murder. You can also extend what I said earlier about the 'living' part. "so your saying that i should have no say in my childs life before it is born... however if i were to think that she should have abortion and she dosent i still have to pay child support. they are half my blood so yes as a male i should have a say in what a woman does. if it was just to her body then i see your point but its 2 bodies not 1 so i do get a say. thats like saying the gov. should not be able to tell you you cant murder someone cause thats solely your decision." --Granted the male did half the work to make it. But it is the female that has ALL the work from now on to deliver. And the fetus cannot survive without her. It is her body that keeps it alive. Not the males. This is for the female to decide because it is her body, not his. If she doesnt want to go through pregnancy, the male might want to consider impregnating someone else if they really want a son or daughter. My opponent ends his speech by saying that I have yet to give any proof for my argument, I find this ironically hypocritical seeing as he is the one to start this debate and he hasn't provided ANY evidence himself. As the pro and arguing against the status quo, he has failed to prove that the status quo is unacceptable. Thus, presumption falls to the con. With that, I await my opponents final rebuttal.