Abortion should remain legal.

Before I begin, we will be debating under the term I set for Abortion as it is more correct. Scientists and physchologists have not found when a fetus is alive, so you cannot call the termination of said fetus the "death of the fetus." My definition does not entail that the fetus is alive or dead, therefore it is unbiased, therefore making it the acceptable definition.Let's refrain from calling the fetus either alive or dead until science has proven when the fetus is alive. Consensual Sex, Rape and Unplanned Pregnancies On the topic of abortion, many people bring up consensual sex and rape, rape most commonly used as the special circumstance many Pro-Life advocates allow for abortions. Now, I am no one to interfere on their continuity, but I do not believe rape is a special case, I believe it is an extreme case that should follow under any allowances given to any other woman- to get an abortion. According to Guttmacher Institute, about half of the estimated 6.7 million pregnancies in the US are unplanned [1]. Also, about half of the female population will experience an unplanned pregnancy by the age of 45 and about three in ten of these women will end up terminating their pregnancy [1]. Do we have the right to force the mother to keep the baby solely because she consented to participate in these sexual activities? Do we have the right to take away another’s right as we continue to fight for other rights? Why do we take away the rights of a woman because she has thepotential to have a baby? In the case of rape, I believe that both sides have come to a blurry agreement that rape may be the exception to the “No Abortion” preaches of Pro-Life advocates. If some do not believe that rape is not an exception, an occurrence undeserving of abortion, why do we not allow the mother to get rid of a pregnancy that is a reminder of what someone forcefully had done to her? More of a thought-provoking question, If we do not force the woman to keep an unwanted baby from rape, why do we not allow her the same opportunities to get rid of an unwanted baby? Keep in mind, the sex was consensual, not the baby. When it comes to unplanned pregnancies, we cannot overlook the boom in teenage pregnancies that are glorified by shows like Teen Mom or 16 and Pregnant. Dosomething.org shows that 3 in 10 teenage girls get pregnant before the age of 20 and that less than 2% of these teen mothers get college degrees before the age of 30 [2]. Do we force these teens to give birth to their babies, even if they do not want the babies for reasons unknown? If we expect them to give birth to the baby, do we then expect the mother to keep the baby? If we do not expect them to keep the baby, what do we suggest is done with the baby? If we expect the baby to go to an adoption center, do we neglect the consequences that the parents may have to face emotionally? The questions are endless and often unanswered. But with statistics like these, we cannot neglect this topic. Additional Fact: Guttmacher Institute states that 99.9% of women use contraceptives at least once in their sexual life and about 62% of the women currently use contraception [3]. It is clear that a majority of the population uses contraceptives to prevent any unwanted pregnancies, and although we all know we run the risk of pregnancy even with contraceptives, we cannot hold women accountable for a condom breaking or a pill not functioning properly. (I realize these are incomparable, but a condom breaking has the same, although extremely less severe, consequence as rape- unwanted pregnancies.)Bodily Autonomy Bodily autonomy is defined as the right for a person to control what they do to their bodies without the interruption or force of someone else. It is a right that is given to everyone and is one of the reasons why it is illegal to take organs from the deceased that have not signed off permission. If we continue this right after life, why do we strip it from a pregnant woman? We cannot morally, or legally (in my opinion), strip away the rights that we grant to the deceased, and to go against this argument would be irrational. Why would you grant a dead person a right that you wouldn’t give to someone that is alive. I’ve read something that rings true, that if someone needs something donated that you have, you are not legally obligated to donate anything. This parallels to pregnancies because a fetus does need these resources, but the mother is not legally obligated to keep giving this baby her resources. Denying to give someone a body part is not illegal, so terminating a pregnancy should not be illegal.Euthanasia When talking about abortion, morals often, if not always, play a part. Some see the fetus as an innocent creature that, because it is dependent on the woman, the woman had the obligation to keep it alive. Well, let’s parallel this to something that we are familiar with- euthanasia. When someone is on life support and dependant on a machine for oxygen and life, there is a time in which morals allow us to pull the plug, thus ending that person’s life. Now, if someone can pull the plug as a way of relieving the other, then how is getting an abortion different? To use the “a fetus is unborn” angle would be illogical because what makes the ending of someone’s life more ethical than ending something before it experiences life? Now, if you are against both euthanasia and abortion, then I commend you for being consistent. However, if you believe in one and not the other, I must question your consistency. Euthanasia, one may say, is the abortion of someone alive, instead of a fetus, having not a 100% chance of being born. Sources: 1. http://www.guttmacher.org...... 2. http://www.dosomething.org...... 3. http://www.guttmacher.org......