I need some help for a speech on abortion?

I can't help with statistics, but I may have a different perspective to consider on the issue in general. There IS NO abortion issue. The ACTUAL issue is "When does life begin?"

If life begins at conception, abortion is deliberately ending a human life. I think we call that murder.

If life begins at birth, abortion is morally equivalent to liposuction.

If life begins at some other time, please identify that point and explain how to tell if any given individual has reached that point.

> (pro-life of course!!)

Why would we assume you are "pro-life"? Most people your age already realize that the government has no explicit right to impose medical procedures on people, yet this is what your positions argues. Oh well, I won't try to persuade you, jsut keep in mind the most persuasive speaker is one that can be equally persuasive from all sides - so don't dismiss the arguments you hear form others out of hand without considering carefully how understanding them deeply affects or limits your own persuasive abilities. that is just general debate advice :)

> found a website that said there have been 48,589,993 abortions performed since the Roe vs. Wade case in 1973

There was a car with a similar bumper sticker near where I used to live. When I walked past, having been a math major, I applied Occam's Razor ( persuasive device, look it up ):

Let's say 35 years, so roughly 1.5 million abortions per year. In that time, our population has managed to increase from roughly 200 million to 300 million people (Of the actually born variety, not of the "not yet born so doesn't yet have standing under our laws variety.").

That would be ~ 5,000 per day 24/7 for 35 years.

My gut tells me that that is very high indeed!

From the other point of view, apply Occams Razor again:

Whatever the abortions rate has been, now we have the population we have, 300 million. As Americans, we use the world's resources at a rate far higher then the rest of the world, and we and the rest of the world are seeing the effects. Argue if you want about climate change, but the truth is, in much of this country, regardless of climate change, we are up against the limits of growth and our ability to supply water t a growing population.

That is the state of the world in 2008.

Without al those abortions, over 35 years, we can expect that those folks would all still be alive (or significantly all of them) and they would have reproduced at roughly 1.2x per person nearly 2 generations now.

So, assuming your 48M abortions is the starting point, we of would have a population increase to support TODAY of 48M + 48M*1.2* (48M*1.2)*1.5, or approximately 48+ 58 + 70M = 176M people, all under the age of 35.

Where would we have the economic resources to provide for roughly a 40 percent increase in our population today?

This is not a matter of a few adoptions,

It is 176 Million people if the pro-life propaganda is to be believed.

Seriously, where do the pro-life people expect to find the resources to house, educate, feed, and those people and the future generations they produce?

I know I am not going to persuade the original asker - s/he said her mind was closed, even though she wants us to have a mind that is open enough to be persuaded - but somewhere there is going to be a reader that is going to say:

Hey! The numbers "pro-life" people present are ridiculous, but they would have us believe that they would rather destroy our world in just a few decades by increasing the rate of resource consumption then live with secular laws regarding a woman's right to choose her own medical procedures.

What kind of people are they that they would do that? Ask yourself deep in your hear if that is the kind of world you want to live in our not, because it is what they are proposing for you!

-------------------

Edit:

Above me, someone wrote:

> The ACTUAL issue is "When does life begin?"

Not really - that is a rhetorical red herring.

>If life begins at conception, abortion is deliberately ending a human life. I think we call that murder.

No that is not murder. Our laws apply to those already born. In fact, the pro-life side is all about chanign exactly that - they want fetuses to have standing under our laws, and that is very radical and very revolutionary. Under our secular legal tradition dating back to at least the Magna Carta, laws apply to those already born, not thse not yet born or already dead.

No secular laws may be different, but in our country we separate religion from government.

> If life begins at birth, abortion is morally equivalent to liposuction.

Maybe, but now I will argue that life neither begins nor ends, it is merely a cycle. Our laws apply to us in this stage, others at other stages are able to decide their own laws and we might not win out there. So be it.

> If life begins at some other time, please identify that point and explain how to tell if any given individual has reached that point.

Since the If part of your premise is not true, there need not be a point where life begins - it simply goes through stages, and our laws apply to the stage we as post-birth people are at..

simple, and persuasive, even hard to argue against, huh? :)

For the love of God do no longer use Bible costs. in case you want human beings to renounce listening to your argument start up spewing Bible verses. i'm professional-decision. What you imagine is your own and that i do not condemn you for it. i am going to allow you to know presently that it is going to be confusing to position in writing about abortionists mendacity, because I fairly don't know the position that got here from and examine were given no thanks to back it up with major evidence (except you say they lie about it no longer being homicide, in which case all of it must be argued lower than the major element of homicide.) also, fairly some professional-existence communities help the mum till she resources the infant and then are nowhere to be discovered. Having the infant is what maximum of them care about, no longer the commonplace of existence. make effective you steer away from suggesting that persevering with the being pregnant isn't a rigidity on the mum. it is going to likely be confusing to lead away from utilizing non secular backing, as your argument is going to be in accordance with ethics taught in those writings. flow seem up some professional-existence web content to work out the arguments, yet make effective you flow to a specialist-decision one besides. the basically right debaters are ones that would at any second swap sides and characteristic sturdy, solid arguments.