Should abortion be legal?

Another point which I argue is that it is much safer if it’s legal because when it wasn’t, many woman resulted in going to “backstreet abortion centres” and even using the coat hanger method in themselves. Both of these suggested above put a woman in grave danger. They could develop an infection, but they could also die because the baby, or foetus, needs to be born or it would make the woman very ill. 

Some females believe that their body or mental health isn’t in a stable position to have a baby yet. They could be financially unstable, too young, too old, mentally unstable, or even have been raped. If you had been raped, you would most likely not want to keep the baby because it will remind you of the awful trauma you had previously faced. If you couldn’t afford a baby, you wouldn’t want to have one because don’t you think bringing a child into the world to live in poverty is just neglectful of the child and parent(s). And although I may not like to think about it, people are having sexual intercourse at very you ages like teenagers or just before. A baby at that age is a severe health risk to the parent. If you were mentally unstable, the child may be taken into care because the mother is unfit to look after the child.  Why have a child just for it to be taken away? What sort of life is that for the child?

Many women have unfortunately had miscarriages in their lives. Later, they may decide to try for a baby again. Halfway through this pregnancy, she might decide she’s now to scared that the same think will happen to this baby to continue the pregnancy. Would you deny a scared woman what she needs to feel safe again?

    DNA is one of the most convincing evidences in a court of law. From the moment the sperm enters the egg, a zygote is formed. According to the Encyclopedia Britanica, "A zygote represents the first stage of a genetically unique organism.". (https://www.britannica.com/science/zygote) Which, in the case of human reproduction, is a human. This is the point when unique, human DNA is developed.

    Since pregnancy is measured from the 1st day of the last menstrual cycle, the development of the zygote actually occurs on week 3 of pregnancy.  Implantation happens around week 4, and by week 5, the baby (at this stage of development is called an embryo) begins developing it's own blood cells, brain, spinal cord, heart, gastrointestinal tract, etc... By weeks 6-7, it starts to develop arms and legs, and a regular heartbeat is established. The brain, spine, bones, eyes, ears, etc... all continue to grow and develop. All of this development typically takes place between 1 and 4 weeks after a woman finds out she's pregnant. (https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/002398.htm)

HEARTBEAT 

    The ONLY example in which a heartbeat does not equal life, is when there is proven brain death and a machine is keeping the heart beating. At around 6 weeks, there are indications of fetal brain waves. (https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/19/books/chapters/the-ethical-brain.html)  Short of brain death (and a machine keeping the heart beating), there is not one example of human life without a heartbeat, or not life with a heartbeat.  If a doctor doesn't find a heartbeat, they expect that there may be a miscarriage.  Is there any example of a "fetus" still growing without a heartbeat? It is an important and valid argument, that needs to be addressed!

    In order to argue that the brain is not fully developed, it must be determined if the brain still developing makes you less human or alive. Keep in mind that all modern science claims that the brain is not fully developed until a minimum age of 25. Some will suggest longer. 

    We have made huge advances in technology in the last 40 years. Imagine where we'll be in another 20 years. The scientific evidence we have today, is overwhelming, and I have found NO scientific evidence to support abortion. Only those who say that, "there is no evidence that there is life". I feel that unique individual DNA, a unique heartbeat (that beats separate from the mother's), and active brain waves are more than enough to determine life. Apparently, the only "science" that can definitively determine life, is "want ". 

What would be accepted as "evidence" that there is life inside of the womb?

    The problem that I have with the "pro" argument on this specific topic, is that there are no answers to this question, or evidence that contradicts the science. This evidence is met with examples of rare but emotional situations, because, apparently that justifies death.

    When discussing abortion, you hear the terms "Embryo" and "Fetus" thrown around a lot. Let's look at what these words mean, according to the Encyclopedia Britannica:

EMBRYO - The early developmental stage of an animal while it is in the egg or within the uterus of the mother. In humans the term is applied to the unborn child until the end of the 7th week following conception; from the 8th week the child is called a fetus.

FETUS - Also spelled foetus, the unborn young of any vertebrate animal, particularly of a mammal, after it has attained the basic form and structure typical of kind.

(I referenced the Encyclopedia Britannica because of its credibility, and specificity. A dictionary would give a more vague usage, as applies to all kinds of things not relevant here. I wanted to address the usage as it applies to human reproduction.)

    The words we choose vary, based on our intentions. Pro-choicers use these words, because they sound clinical and void of emotional attachments. Pro-Lifers use words like baby and child, because they do invite emotions. Both are right in the terms they use. However, one is tying emotion to life, the other is separating.  Emotionally devaluing life is dangerous. Look at what a stain slavery is on the pages of American history.

1st point - Nobody, certainly not myself (considering you had the opening post) made ANY suggestions about a woman's sexuality. There are many forms of contraception that are very effective (especially when used in combination) I strongly disagree with the "it's not there fault".

2nd point - To quote pro on her 1st point,  "As a woman myself, I believe that the control over our bodies is our and solely ours.". Also, back alley abortions would still be considered abortion and would be illegal.  I understand that people will still break the law, it's inevitable. The best we can do is educate, and enforce the laws. You really can't argue that "because people are going to break the law, that we shouldn't have laws".

3rd point - This point will take more in depth discussion. We will discuss this more in the next segment. 

4th point - I'm not sure how you're arguing that, if a woman had a miscarriage, decided to "try again" for a baby, and then decided "halfway through" that she was so "scared" of having a miscarriage that she would have to terminate the pregnancy in order to "feel safe". Is that not forcing the outcome she is scared of?