Is my subpoint for a debate good?

[Mastretta]

I have a debate tomorrow and I wanna know if it is any good?, I'm only in the 8th grade and only did about 5 debate speeches so keep that in mind.

Now to date 1 in 5 of children of the US are living in poverty and half living in low income families, an astonishing number for the country of the free and brave, but remember the free is only for some topics. My first sub point states that abortions gives a women a sense of security in that if they may happen to become conceived she has the choice to help secure a plan for her family and not feel she has to put her baby is danger of not having a “Perfect” life as a child. The people who want to pass bill H.R.7 are also the same people who want to cut off funding for welfare, that includes food assistants and housing which are the fundamentals living, if half of Americans live in low income homes there is no way a women can take care of her child without government assistance, In the US we spend $668 billion dollars per year on 126 different welfare programs, which . This can only be changed if more oppruntunites for mothers to get training in professional jobs.

[Vlerchan]

I'm most likely too late here but:
Now to date 1 in 5 of children of the US are living in poverty and half living in low income families, an astonishing number for the country of the free and brave, but remember the free is only for some topics. My first sub point states that abortions gives a women a sense of security in that if they may happen to become conceived she has the choice to help secure a plan for her family and not feel she has to put her baby is danger of not having a “Perfect” life as a child[1]. The people who want to pass bill H.R.7 are also the same people who want to cut off funding for welfare, that includes food assistants and housing which are the fundamentals living[2], if half of Americans live in low income homes there is no way a women can take care of her child without government assistance[3], In the US we spend $668 billion dollars per year on 126 different welfare programs, which . This can only be changed if more oppruntunites for mothers to get training in professional jobs.[4]

[1]: This is the point in which the opposition jumps in with their point about adoption. You'd be best to prepare some form of rebuttal for that - I can almost guarantee you that it is coming.

[2]: Bad idea - unless you know for certain that the opposition are going to advocate this in the debate. Not all those who are anti-abortion support cutting welfare or are (right) neo-liberals. There's plenty of socially-conservative leftists.

[3]: This is the point in which the opposition jumps in with their point about adoption and/or charity. It'd be best to prepare a rebuttal for this.

[4]: Irrelevant. Though playing up sympathy is not a bad idea.

The problem with the economic argument - unless this is specifically concerning allowing economically-disadvantaged woman to have abortions - is that it is simply too easy to counter: government-assistance, charity and adoption are all readily available. You'd be better to focus on the idea that debarring woman from abortion infringes on her human-rights: security of person; bodily-autonomy. You'll be told that 'baby'-murder would infringe on the fetus' rights but then it is as simple as offering the point that a fetus is not legally-recognized as a human-being and hence does not possess such rights. Regardless, good luck.

[Mastretta]

I'm most likely too late here but:


[1]: This is the point in which the opposition jumps in with their point about adoption. You'd be best to prepare some form of rebuttal for that - I can almost guarantee you that it is coming.

[2]: Bad idea - unless you know for certain that the opposition are going to advocate this in the debate. Not all those who are anti-abortion support cutting welfare or are (right) neo-liberals. There's plenty of socially-conservative leftists.

[3]: This is the point in which the opposition jumps in with their point about adoption and/or charity. It'd be best to prepare a rebuttal for this.

[4]: Irrelevant. Though playing up sympathy is not a bad idea.

The problem with the economic argument - unless this is specifically concerning allowing economically-disadvantaged woman to have abortions - is that it is simply too easy to counter: government-assistance, charity and adoption are all readily available. You'd be better to focus on the idea that debarring woman from abortion infringes on her human-rights: security of person; bodily-autonomy. You'll be told that 'baby'-murder would infringe on the fetus' rights but then it is as simple as offering the point that a fetus is not legally-recognized as a human-being and hence does not possess such rights. Regardless, good luck.
Thank you for the help, but the debate got delayed to tomorrow (Monday) so my partner who I've been working with told me her her speech so I already have decent rebuttal and I want be as nervous because this is the first time I'm actually gonna be up against someone.