The Bible supports the pro-life cause.

I wish to thank Con once again for taking up this debate challenge.Con says God's own words are that he cares not for man's laws, but doesn't source his claim (and of course, if he sources it in this round I won't be able to respond if it has been taken out of context to show that Con is misunderstanding the words of God). While it is true no one is innocent in the eyes of God in a spiritual sense, because we all sin, there are people innocent of crimes. I may be a guilty sinner, but I have never committed murder. So to throw me in jail and kill me through capital punishment is to punish me for a crime I did not commit. If I rob a bank and I am killed for it, I am still being punished unfairly because the penalty for bank robbery is not death. Con is simply confusing spiritual guilt for physical guilt.The statement "we are all deserving of death" does not mean "we are all deserving of being killed." God gives life, so only he has the right to take it. As I have mentioned, God taking life does not give us grounds to take it through any act, be it murder or abortion.God can do things that he hates to do. Second Peter 3:9 tells us that God does not want any to perish but that all should come to repentance, yet people do perish. They are condemned for their sin and consigned to Hell for eternity. God hates the shedding of innocent blood, but as much as God is loving He is also righteous and cannot tolerate sin. So Con's argument is simply incorrect. Plus, as I mentioned those people are not truly innocent. When God called for a nation's death, it was because of divine justice (usually because of the sin of idolatry).We do not have precedent for God killing innocent children and human-law innocents. It is telling that he didn't give any examples. And of course, if he brings them up in this round I will not be able to respond to them.Con is simply incorrect when he says that God supported the rape of virgins vicariously through Moses. Moses was God's agent, but everything he said wasn't condoned by God. In fact, Moses was denied entrance to the promised land because of his sin (Numbers 20:1-12). Just because the Bible records it does not mean God condones it. It is sloppy exegesis to claim that everything the Bible records, it condones. You must read passages in context for their meaning, not just pull one or a few verses out of context to support your contention.I have already explained why the Bible's silence on abortion does not condone it. Re-read my opening argument for that. I have also explained that the unborn are humans and considered children, even in the Bible. I don't need to reiterate that here. I have also explained why God's killing of someone does not give us license to do so. God killed Ananias and Sapphira in the book of Acts for their lying. That does not mean we can go around killing everyone who tells a lie.Now Con resorts to extra-biblical information to make his case, but this is irrelevant to the case at hand. My case is that the Bible supports the pro-life case. Whether or not the unborn human is actually a child is irrelevant -- the Bible considers it as such. That's all that matters for this debate. I have shown in other debates that the unborn are living human organisms biologically, but that is outside the scope of this debate. If Con wishes to debate me on the scientific aspect of the debate, he may challenge me if he wishes.God never allows for abortion. I have already explained the meaning of Numbers 5 and Con seems to have ignored my response.I have shown why the Bible supports a pro-life case and Con has not sufficiently argued against it. Thank you for reading, and thank you to Con for your time.