Resolved: The United States should value the pro-life stance above the pro-choice stance.

I affirm.My opponent has forfeited the Round 3 speech for an unknown reason. I will not provide too much offense in this speech but rather impact my arguments and state the voting issues for today's round very briefly.Voting Issue 1: RightsCon wants to uphold that it can hold the right to liberty by allowing women to choose whether or not to have an abortion.My plan upholds the right to liberty as WELL (by not restricting abortions), but ALSO prioritizes the right to life of a human child. A woman should not be able to determine the fate of an innocent human being. A child should be entitled to the same rights that the woman has. Since my definition of "life" goes uncontested in the Round 3 speech, please let Pro win Rights.Voting Issue 2: Psychological Well-BeingCon says that the stress and drama that women face after an abortion is caused by the fact that pro-lifers forced them not to have an abortion. This is contradictory to when my opponent says that only FIVE percent of women feel negative emotions after having an abortion.I win psychological well-being because suicides, depression, and regret are not in the best interests of the United States, nor are they in the best interests of maximizing net benefits. To prevent these things, we should encourage women NOT to have an abortions. Therefore, Pro wins this voting issue.Voting Issue 3: Physical Well-BeingThere's very little offense coming out of the Con's case that responds to my physical well-being point. Basically, women who ahve abortions are 50% more likely to develop breast cancer. This, as is the second voting issue, is a violation of net benefits. Miscarriages and cancer are deplorable and agonizing situations, and we should ENCOURAGE (not coerce) women not to make decisions that are more likely to bring them into these terrible effects. Pro wins the fact that abortion is a HEALTHIER option, because women are healther if they do NOT abort.Voting Issue 4: Economic IntegrityThe key points that Pro would like to extend are that:1. Planned Parenthood is funded by a lot of people who OPPOSE Roe v. Wade2. most of the abortion industry is made up of back-alley abortions, which are driven by a profit incentive and NOT by maximizing the health of a womanBecause Con has negligible response to the fact that the pro-choice promotes economic corruption and societal immorality, please let Pro win this voting issue.Voting Issue 5: Consistency with NormsThe Hippocratic Oath was intended to make it HARD for women to get abortions. There really isn't any gray round with abortion; it's pretty black and white. If a bioethical document was intended to make abortions unpopular or difficult, why encourage them in the first place? It's inconsistent with our intution. Con doesn't make ANY response to this Hippocratic Oath argument specifically, so Pro wins consistency with norms.Nowhere in my plan do I prohibit women from getting abortions. Nowhere in my plan do I exploit the right to liberty. All I argue is that pregnant women who do not abort their alive, human children should be incentivized with small tax benefits. Since Con has failed to generate enough reasons to believe that my plan should not be implemented, please vote Pro.I now turn the debate over to Con for voting issues.