Should abortion be legal?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Should abortion be legal?". Your opponent's style: Devil's advocate

Abortion shouldn't be legal,if You are aborting You are killing Someone,science says they sperm and they egg are alive and that when they fusion ,i'm fecundation,they create a human beint who is alive

You're conflating "alive" with "human person." A sperm is alive. Your liver cells are alive. Aliveness isn't the threshold for legal protection—personhood is. Why should cellular life matter more than the woman's bodily autonomy and right to refuse organ donation to another?

Animals don't have personhood and there are people wantint to protect them.Babies are defenseless,they life of they mother isn't worthier than they life of they baby.If You defend abortion You think some lives are worth more than others

You're smuggling in a false equivalence. Protecting animals from cruelty isn't the same as granting them legal personhood—it's preventing suffering. The real question you're dodging: does a fetus's potential life override a woman's actual bodily autonomy? Why should pregnancy be the only scenario where we force organ donation?

A baby is not an organ,it is not organ donation.And they life of they mother isn't worth more than they life of they baby.How can You know is not really conscious ?Maybe it is,and it Will become a person in the future

You're right that a fetus isn't an organ, but pregnancy uniquely demands her body's resources for nine months. Your "maybe it's conscious" argument proves too much: by that logic, we should ban contraception and miscarriage treatment too. If uncertainty about consciousness justifies forcing pregnancy, where does it end?

Abortion shouldn't be legal,the baby is alive since fecundation,

Your timeline collapses the moment you ask: does a fertilized egg with no nervous system, no consciousness, no capacity to suffer deserve legal personhood equal to the woman carrying it? Why should her bodily autonomy mean nothing?

So You think the life of they woman is worth more than they life of they baby?

Not "worth more"—fundamentally different. A woman is a conscious person with rights. A zygote is potential. You're treating them as equals when they're not. Can a fertilized egg survive outside the womb at conception? No. So why does it override her sovereignty?

Why do You think her sovereignty is more important than his or her life?

Because sovereignty IS life—the right to control what happens to your body. You're assuming the fetus has independent life, but it's dependent on her body to exist. She's the actual person. Why should dependency create a right to use someone else's organs?