How to shut up people who are against abortion

[That guy who asked questions]

This argument is one of the stupidest things ever conceived. The fucking 'What if?' Argument. Have you heard the one about Beethoven:

Doctor 1: "I want your opinion about terminating a pregnancy. The father was syphilitic, the mother had tuberculosis. Of the four children born, the first was blind, the second died, the third was deaf and dumb, the fourth also had tuberculosis. What would you have done?"
Doctor 2: "I would have terminated the pregnancy."
Doctor 1: "Then you would have murdered Beethoven."

Hopefully any person in their right mind can see how absolutely ridiculous this argument is. Whats worse is the facts about this argument aren't even true. Beethoven was not a 4th child at all.
[/quote]

You're sort of behind on my arguments. I explained the reasoning behind my "what if" premise, and detailed the question I am asking.

---

A fetus is distinctly different from a full-term newborn. I don't deny that a fetus is human, of course it is. A woman does not become pregnant with a cat or a salamander, but a human.
However, a fetus is incapable of sustaining its own life, in terms of having its own blood supply (meaning enough blood), getting nourishment, getting oxygen, etc., in terms of possessing the basic life systems enabling it to support and keep itself alive. This is deficient in comparison to a newborn that can breathe on its own, suckle and get food without inhaling and taking the food into its lungs. Hell, newborns even demonstrate they can move to reach a food source. Go to YouTube and search for "breast crawl." You'll find videos of newborns laid on their mother's stomachs crawling up her chest to her breasts and latching on to eat. In this sense, providing food for a newborn (breast or bottle) is very different than providing food for a severely premature infant, which requires medical intervention.
The earliest a fetus can be born and have even a 50/50 chance of survival is about 24 weeks gestation. Up to that point, there's nothing anyone can do, even the best neonatal doctors and hospitals in the world. In my view, up to this point the fetus is solely the mother's responsibility and burden. It is her decision to allow this life to grow and develop inside of her body, or not.
I'm all for the prevention of unwanted pregnancy. I say unwanted instead of unplanned, because an unplanned pregnancy isn't necessarily an unwanted one. I am not in favor of women using abortion as a form of birth control. This is almost impossible to police, though. Women who have multiple abortions thinking there are no consequences are mistaken, a woman's future fertility and ability to carry a pregnancy to term is effected by receiving multiple abortions. However, all forms of contraception have some percentage of failure. This means, even in cases where a woman has had a tubal ligation, there are some women who will still be able to get pregnant. Women get pregnant on every form of birth control, including IUD's (which often leads to miscarriage). We need better contraception. I think a very promising form is currently being developed. It's a shot for men that causes their testes to stop making sperm. It's still in development though.

Then why are we arguing? lol my only objection to abortion is in the circumstance where it is an escape route of responsibility as a result of irresponsible actions. I find abortion shouldn't be used in the case where a woman has willing unprotected sex, gets pregnant, and then aborts on the only premise of "I don't want a kid right now." I just asked the question, "Is it moral to terminate another human's life regardless of stage of development?" to provoke some thought.

---

Don't want to be called a killer? Don't kill another human...

I don't care if I'm called a killer by anti-abortion bro's.

But yeah, abortion is the one thing in that list that is out of place because abortion effects the fetus/human/whatever you want to call it without its consent.

Which I think is the biggest reason it is of such great debate, but it's mostly caused from the massive consensus that we all have a soul. but if we are all nothing more than a collection of cells that for some reason has a the ability to think and feel consciously and unconsciously, at the developmental stage of an embryo/fetus has no detection of pain then it shouldn't be determined an immoral action if we are all judging morality on the striving to human flourishing and avoiding negative human emotions, such as pain and sadness.