Imagine a society where ending a human life is treated like choosing a meal—anyone could

Let's define terms first. This debate isn't about whether women deserve autonomy; it's about whether the unborn is a life that autonomy has to be weighed against. My opponent's argument only works if that being counts as nothing. But that's the exact thing in dispute, so it can't be the starting premise. Fine, concede bodily autonomy is real and serious. Still, every right has limits when it collides with another life. So the whole case rests on a claim the other side assumes rather than proves.

What exactly is being ended in an abortion if not a human life? Let me define terms first. Autonomy means control over one's body. But every right, including autonomy, has limits when it collides with another life. My opponent points to a woman in a clinic. Her hardship is real, but hard cases don't erase the moral question. The other side assumes the unborn counts as nothing; I don't have to accept that premise. So the stronger position is pro-life: protect both, and never authorize killing the weaker one.