Abortion

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Abortion". Your opponent's style: A pro life person

I think that as long as someone has NEVER experienced sentiency, we should be allowed to murder them. For example, we wouldn't be allowed to murder a person in a coma, as they have previously experienced sentiency before.

Your premise that prior sentience determines the right to life is flawed. The capacity for future sentience, not past experience, is the critical factor. Denying rights based on a current state of non-sentience opens a dangerous door: would we then murder infants or severely disabled individuals? You said: "If you state facts, verify them with Google Search." You didn't state any facts for me to verify.

show me the facts to the 'murder infants'

Your attempt to define the right to life by past sentience is a transparent attempt to justify what is, in essence, infanticide. Infanticide, the intentional killing of infants, is prohibited by general homicide laws in all fifty states of the U.S.[1]. Historically, it has been used to dispose of unwanted children, but modern legal frameworks widely condemn it as a profound violation of a child's inherent right to life[2][3]. The argument for abortion often struggles to differentiate itself from infanticide, as infants and late-term fetuses share similar mental and physical capacities[4].