death penalty and abortion should be illegal

as far as 18th century punishment is concerned, thank you for clearing up my confusion. at first glance i thought you were trying to say that absolutely NO other form of punishment existed but i now realize that you were trying to justify the death penalty in a society where absolutely NO other form of punishment existed. "angles of attack"... i never take that into consideration when sparking up a debate. i purposely invoked "and" because i DO believe in the banning of the death penalty and abortion altogether. in fact i almost encourage more "angles of attack" to get the full meaning out of a debate as it also gives me more angles to counter-attack the initial "attack". i hold my position strongly as i also see you do. BIBLE i personally will never try to push my faith on anyone that doesn't accept it but i will continue to use my faith as the foundation of my arguments. i understand that for this debate we should only be focusing on the two issues i initially brought up so i will refrain as much as possible from "pushing" my faith onto your arguments as i have complete respect for the many other beliefs people have and obviously yours to be specific. if by any chance you would like to debate the atheist viewpoint that a God doesn't exist, then i will gladly accept the challenge and back up what i have to say. i will also go on to say that i'm guessing this debate has no further meaning amongst either of us because my beliefs on abortion come from what i believe is in the bible. my whole argument doesn't depend on the morality or immorality of the topic but rather depends on how i believe God would handle the situation. i should've made that clearer in round one before someone decided to accept the challenge. allow me to clarify the statement i made... "nowhere in the bible does it mention how abortion under ANY circumstance is justified and therefore i feel that the issue of animals and babies should be kept separate." this again goes back to the fact that you are not willing to accept biblical text as being true or factual on any level which basically means my whole argument is not valid to you. i'm arguing with a "wall" so to speak (i mean that in no offense to you). if you would like for me to prove God and the bible's existence then i will do so in a respective debate. in round one you mentioned a comparison amongst animals and aborted babies. you said "Some, if not most, of these slaughtered animals are fully formed, they have instincts of survival, are self-sufficient, and so on. These animals are more fully formed than a fetus in the early phases of gestation, when the fetus can be legally aborted. Even if you were a vegetarian, why would the issue of abortion be more pressing than these animals, when the amount of animals slaughtered for consumption is notably greater than the fetuses being aborted, in addition to the fact that the animals consumed are fully formed?" the basis of my argument against abortion is this... whether fully formed or 10 seconds old, killing is killing. abortion should be taken the same as a man killing an animal for pure sport. i do NOT believe abortion should be a more pressing issue than the unjustified killing of animals as i believe we are all God's creatures. i DO believe however that the only justification for killing an animal comes from the intent of the killer. if the killer soley uses the animals flesh as means of helping his family stay nourished, then it is acceptable. AGAIN this comes from the bible which i know has no meaning to you so i can easily understand why this point would seem completely ridiculous. "it is purely a question of whether you think it is moral or not." "Although you do not provide clear justification for this comment, I strongly disagree. I think that it is perfectly acceptable to consider the problem in a purely practical and logical way."... let me just say this, if you choose to think of abortion from any viewpoint other than that of "moral or not", i ask you, what does the ending argument result in? it results in whether or not you think it is absolutely necessary for the woman to have an abortion. which then is obviously a quesiton of morality because of the two sides that arise from this conflict. one side says i do not think it is necessary under any circumstance to have an abortion therefore i will go on to say that any person choosing to have an abortion is immoral. i would like to meet one person who is against abortion but does not think abortion itself or the person opting to have an abortion is immoral. it's hypocracy. you either condone the slaughtering of innocent babies or you don't. it's hard to take in the viewpoint of someone who says i don't believe in abortion but i would opt to have one under a certain circumstance. same with the bible. you either believe all of it or none of it. you don't believe in the bible sometimes or under a certain situation. you're a believer or non-believer. and in response to the "justification" comment you made, please justify how you would solve the issue of abortion in a practical or logical way WITHOUT rising the conflict of morality. again, in response to the justification of animals being slaughtered, i will save my response for another debate that is only dealing with proof that God does or does not exist which can then lead to a discussion of the factuality of the bible. for the purposes of this debate however, i will refrain from including my biblical arguments. the issue of sperm and whether or not it is being wasted by masturbating or by NOT masturbating is an endless argument. you cannot justify a point that you canceled out in your own argument. and yes we do agree that the issue of adoption does become a lot more complicated but that has nothing to do with the "firehouse" proposition being a solution or not. it's only a matter of how much the government is willing to spend on housing for orphans should a federal abortion ban exist. the answer to your question of "Thus, can't abortion up to the 18th day be reconciled with your religious beliefs?" is no. i am running out of characters to use for this argument and this would take me quite a while to show you the dozens of ways you're taking biblical text out of context but i will refrain and again encourage you to start up a debate dealing with this particular topic if you so choose to further my biblical arguments i have made.