Debate: Should people have abortions?
Side: Yes, its not even alive

You know this how exactly? Since a fetus is from 8 weeks until full term. How do you know their mental status?It's difficult to feel emotions when parts of your brain are not there yet.To clarify, I do not think abortion is necessary after viability. In that case, a voluntary cesarean section can preserve both the life of the fetus and the bodily autonomy of the mother. Cases where the mother's health is endangered are exceptions. Therefor, when I use the word fetus, it is to refer to fetuses prior to 22-24 weeks or so. I apologize for not mentioning this sooner as it is an important component of my arguments. Murder for the mother's convenience. That's a great reason (sarcastic of course).An unwanted pregnancy and subsequent birth are far more stressful and life-altering than a mere inconvenience. Do not lie to yourself about its severity and consequences, both psychological and physical, just so it is easier to oppose abortion.Why not just say murder? It's a child in development. Children who are feeble bodied can't survive without the support of others. Should we kill them too?No, because if their caretaker no longer wants the job of caring for the dependent, they can resign and someone else can take their place. What about adolescents, they are still developing as well? Why not kill them, if it's not convenient for the mother to be a parent?No, because if their caretaker no longer wants the job of caring for the dependent, they can resign and someone else can take their place.How far can we go with the definition of a developing human? How much mental awareness does a child have when it's born? If it can't be happy or sad why then should we care?It doesn't matter, because they are not engaged in the same type of parasitic relationship with their mother. If the mother doesn't want it, it's life need not be ended. It can be given up for adoption.I would like to submit the negative connotation that parasite implies. Although it may be factual by definition, it certainly isn't neutral. I submit that you are the one projecting negative connotations. I do not bear any ill will towards any fetuses, wanted or not. Its parasitism, or complete dependence upon another organism for survival, is just an important point in my argument.How is this different from 12 weeks gestation to 7 years old? Birth or not you can clearly see it's a human.Because making this comparison is to say that abortion is equivalent to someone stabbing a 7 year old to death, and this severely trivialized both the mindset necessary to kill an actual child, and the suffering endured by the actual child.That is the society we are in now. Is not the child's fate subject to the 'whims' of the mother? Not a 'potential person' a human in development. While it does have the potential to be a fully developed human being. It is human nonetheless. Potential person, human in development, whatever. Its interests should be second to the actual person/developed human on whom their survival depends. The law does not really recognize potential. Every child is a potential adult, but if an adult has sex with a minor, they face criminal charges, because the law does not treat minors as adults because they have the potential to become adults. They treat them as minors because they are minors. I am not saying liberalism is the reason for crime. I am saying the liberalism ideal (which includes a major lack in morals). And the symptom of that is a lawless society.You mean morals that you consider acceptable.If our society can accept the genocide of millions of developing humans, what should stop anyone from killing 'developed' humans?The intelligence to differentiate the abortion of a fetus from the murder of an actual thinking, feeling, physically independent person.Abortion is a very old practice so unless you are going to blame all instances of genocide on the practice of abortion, then this argument doesn't have much to stand on. It's not as if modern America invented it.