Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

The only time I can be considered a person is when I'm fully awake and conscious. When I'm asleep, drugged or in a coma, I'm unconscious, therefore I'm not a person, therefore I no longer possess the rights attached to consciousness until I regain consciousness. This is the result of attaching conditional clauses to the right to life.No, this is not how it works. There is still sufficient mental activity in your brain, and since we know that people who are asleep or drugged generally do recover, there is no sense in "killing" them just because they were not externally conscious at this exact moment. Perhaps they are dreaming, or perhaps they are on a DMT drug trip. Only in the realm of coma's does it get tricky. The medical field already struggles with issues of ethics in this situation. Therefore, the personhood criteria does exclude sleeping people, comatose people and drugged people.It does not exclude sleeping, or drugged people. Like I said earlier, there is always activity in the brain (otherwise they would be brain dead, which is synonymous with death), and it is fairly likely that they could be dreaming or having a drug trip. And like I said before, the coma issue is tricky. Yes, I as a person, exist in my brain. But I am more than a person. I'm a part of something objective that trancends my personhood - I'm a human being. My personhood can be taken from me, but not my humanity. And to me, humanity is what qualifies me for my inalienable rights, not something frail and easily destroyable - such as my person, which is nothing more than a physical product of my brain.I disagree. If you were to cut out every single non essential to you, part of your body, you would end up with your brain. Let's say we put your brain in a robot. Is the robot "you" ? This is what you're saying with your body, it came with your brain. But you are not your body, you are your brain. What you're saying is that if you were brain dead, and ceased being a person, you would still qualify for rights. This is ridiculous. If you cease being a person, your brain gets destroyed or something, you are no longer you. You cease to exist. Why do your human rights matter if there is no one home in your body? I can stop being a person, but I cannot ever stop being a human being. This is why they're called Human Rights and not Person Rights - the former is objective and eternal, the latter is temporary and easily destroyable.While you exist, you are both a person and a human being. But when you cease to exist, for example with brain death, how can you still be a human if you've stopped existing in the first place? The same way killing a sleeping human being is murder. Murder is the intentional termination of someone's life without their consent, right? Since we terminate the human being without their consent, isn't it murder by default?The entirety of your argument rested on a misinterpretation of person hood on your part. Sleeping humans are still people, as I explained above. This whole discussion is about abortion, not the murder of full grown humans. In regards to a fetus less than roughly 24 weeks, it is not murder because it is not a person since it lacks all qualities of person hood. It is the killing of something that is alive, but people do that everyday. When you take a shower, you kill thousands if not millions of cells. Same thing happened when you scraped your elbow as a child.