Abortion, (from athiest perspective.)

For one last time I give clarification on the 'all babies that can die must' comment. by all that 'can' I mean all that we can afford to lose, by all that we can afford to lose I mean whatever that number is that sceintiest calculate out to be the amount of population the next generation can be reduced by and our race be okay.I think amoung the things I might have missed last round was Cons case that he does not believe unborn babies should have a right to life based on diven right from a God, but that it was pure logic taking in risks of what they might do to what they might be able to do. I think something is off with your calculations though, for every Mother Teresa in history you could name I could name you an Edward Teach (if not 2!). net potential of what a child might become will cancle out to zero since as you agreed its just too early to say anything about what the child could have become.potential simply does not give an unborn child a right to its life over a mothers right to end its life. I do not think my opponent has argued the case well enough that it does give the child the right prove it so.second thing I missed the last round was the Cons case that I have failed to explain why its necessary to provide for the greater good, and why killing unborn children does this good.first, I do not have to show abortion neccisary to affirm the resolution, I only need to show it prefreable to affirm the the resolution. As a cause for why our population will be reduced, I think I have shown its preferable to the cause for population reduction my opponent advocates, bubonic plauge.As for how abortion promotes the cause of population reduction, it should be self-explanatory. some of the next generations lives are ended before birth, so they cant add to the current population themselves, and they cant create additions to the next generation (after their own) population. surely this will help plauges and war have time to catch up to balance off what additions to population the babies that are allowed to live add.As for my opponent case about why we have not reached the overpopulation problem yet, by his logic the trillion dollar deficet is not a problem because havent actually auctioned off land to chiniese people yet, or global warming is not a problem yet for us because glaciers still exist. these problems should not just be passed on untill its so late that there consequences begin to hurt us. they need delt with now.you say you are saying 'easy come easy go' to but you still hold all should be given a chance at life. these are not compatible unless you redifined life just now to mean long enough to have your diapers changed. earleir you were arguing for a definition that its deffinitly alive in the woumb an even now you speak of how a biologist would say all life starts at conception. so the unborn children in question are alive an have had there 'chance at life' though it was a short life indeed. If you argue they must hang on to that life longer still than your not arguing 'easy go'If a child dies quickly in the woumb its axiomatic its not barbaric. the brain that allows the child to feel pain is eliminated before the child can feel the pain. a.k.a. painless death. perhaps its barbaric to watch siscors stabed into an nearly born infants skull, but its if its barbaric for the child that experinces it thats important. painless death to endure equalls not barbaric.In Conclusion I do not think Con gave any good reasons for an athiest to think a unborn child has a right to life this debate.I conclude that though overpopulation may one day cause events that will solve the overpopulation problem, it is those events we wish to avoid that make us call it a problem in the first place.Dropping my athiest role playing here, I also conclude at the end of this debate that It's God alone that can give you any claim on a right to your life before other mortals. otherwise such rights it are absurd, you did not pay for it or work for it. your life just 'happened' to you. you not being apart of your own creation have no claim on it that your maker does not give to you. without God the closest beings you can call your maker is your mom and dad, and if she wanted an abortion that by definition means she did not give you the right to your life, so you cannot lose something you dont have or are owed to start with.