Abortion is Morally Right

"I am debating that the abortion cause is more ethical than the anti-abortion cause." -Opponent (Emphasis mine)Hello everyone. I am an agnostic christian anarcho capitalist, this means that I disagree with just about everybody on everything which is why I didn't have much difficulty in taking up the task of opposing the position that "Abortion is Morally Right", despite the incredibly ambiguity of it.In my head I was picturing my opponent standing on top of a mountain of dead 3rd trimester fetus' immortalized in a detailed statue inside a building akin to the Parthenon where people would come and pay hommage to her great works, and the undoing of so much injustice in the world -the injustice of fetus' being alive-.Alas, I did not have such luck. She is trying to espouse a utilitarian ethic, wherein all lives are of equal utility and worth.Paradoxically, I'm going to debunk this by first introducing a proposition that I know can not be scientifically proven in any way. Something that has absolutely no primary evidence and cannot be tested in any way. It is this:Human beings are sentient.There have been many definitions and tests posed for consciousness/self-awareness/the soul/the spirit of the human being, but at the end of the day the only reason we know it exists is because we know it ourselves.It is that which you're left with when you take away all of your senses and stop thinking.It is what defines time. Not the time on a clock, or the relational movements of matter. The time that you experience.When you present a rock to a computer, it can analyze it, get its precise measurements, and color, even far beyond what our senses are capable of, and it will be able to tell you or me that it is a rock, but when you pull apart a computer and dig into it, it's 0's and 1's.When go outside and pick up a rock. It's not measurements or colors, or any specific detail. It's a rock. Even if you didn't know the word "rock".I know all of that is true from nothing but introspection. No experiment can test for it, though many have been theorised.This is is important because it establishes that you and I are completely unique. That even if I was duplicated exactly (molecule for molecule), we are not interchangeable.The most detailed computer yet created could not make sense of anything I just said to you. It's complete utter incomprehensible and rediculous nonsense.After all, if you had two identical bottlecaps in front of you, you wouldn't say either is unique. It doesn't matter which is where or what you do with it. They're completely interchangeable.So human beings have this capacity for unique value that nothing else we know of has.Because of this irreplaceable unique attribute -sentience- human beings are individually unique. The value of a human being is never interchangeable for another.If you buy that, then you understand why a utilitarian argument of trading lives of young people for other people (no matter how many) doesn't work. I'm banking on you being sentient just like I am.A fetus is HumanA human being's life is a continuum of changes from conception to death. It shares the same exact DNA. I was once a fetus, you were once a fetus.If you can show me one credible measurable demarcation that biologically differentiates between a fetus and a baby as seperate organisms I will forfeit this debate to you.fetus -> X -> babyHUMANConception -> Embryo -> Fetus -> baby -> infant -> child -> adolescent -> young adult -> adult -> seniorEach signifies the developmental stages of a human being, none signify organisms changing from one to another.Since every stage between conception to birth is a human being, killing it, by definition, is homicide and since the victim is innocent of any wrongdoing, it is murder."Chances of the Woman’s Death"-OpponentMy opponent suggests that because we can save the lives of a few mothers, we should just abort en-masse indiscrimanently.Most people that I know of that are pro-life, including myself, don't have a problem aborting a child when the mother's life is at risk.It's still homicide, and it's a tough decision, but that's between the mother and the doctor when the mother's life is at risk."According to Procon.org, 'Some estimates claim that legalized abortion accounted for as much as 50% of the drop in murder, property crime, and violent crime between 1973 and 2001.' "-OpponentI'm not sure how reliable "some estimates" are, but lets assume they're right as well as your other figure of 2 trillion dollars. I'll just give you all of that ground.Between 1973 and 2001 39,287,430 fetus' were aborted.(1) By 2019, if they radically underperform the general population at $20,000/yr, they would be producing $785,748,600,000 dollars worth of goods and services annuallyMurder crime rates went from 9.4 to 5.6 cases. (2)(3)Property crimes rates went from 3,737.0 to 3,658.1 cases. (2)(3)Violent crime rates went from 417.4 to 504.5 (2)(3)(Per 100,000 population)So I guess according to 'some estimates', reducing the GDP of the US by ~800 billion dollars and killing ~40 million people was worth it because it saved ~1802 people, reduced property crime by 1.05%, and increased violent crime by 20.8%.And since there was an overall increase in the crime rates, a reduction in the cost of crime is somewhere between zero and laughable.PainThe pain inflicted has little bearing on whether abortion is moral or not. The entire debate hinges on whether it's murder and whether that murder is justified.It is murder, and it's not justified. It is only justified in cases where the mothers life is at risk.1: http://www.johnstonsarchive.net...2: http://www.fbi.gov...3: http://www.disastercenter.com...