Outside of endangerment of the mother's life abortion is completely immoral

I'll keep these separated by argument, for clarity's sake.1. In cases of severe genetic of developmental deformities, to save the child from sufferingYou state that under the circumstances I presented, abortion 'might' be acceptable. If there are any factors in this situation that you still have concern about, I would love to discuss them. There's a difference between saying something might be acceptable, and something is acceptable, and I'm interested to know what your reservations are.2. In cases of rapeYou asked why I make rebuttals for points we agree upon. The reason is because it seems like we don't agree, and the responses to your questions you wrote have ignored the points I made about them in the previous round. Namely:a) Abortion does not change the fact that the rape happened, however not having the abortion continues to traumatize the rape victim daily, for months or years, potentially harming the woman exponentially more than the rape act itself. b) The baby deserves a chance to live and be loved and cared for. At the same time, the woman has deserves the chance to be freed from being retraumatized daily. These are incompatible, so the most moral choice is the one that causes the least suffering. Aborting a child before it develops a nervous system, brain and cognitive functions results in no suffering whatsoever. Forcing the mother to carry the child results in extreme suffering and potentially life-long scarring. The choice is clear.We don't seem to agree on these points, and that is the reason why I make my rebuttals.I agree with my opp that Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) is a great and proven method of dealing with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and is often used with both war veterans and rape victims to help them heal from the trauma they've experienced. That said, it's important to note that it is used with war veterans, after they have returned from the field. It cannot be successfully used to help those who are still being traumatized. To suggest that CBT would help a woman forced to carry her rapist's child is equivalent to saying CBT would help a soldier who is still being held as a prisoner of war and tortured every day. To heal, you must first have to have the freedom to separate yourself from the trauma.As for adoption, I would definitely say that forcing a woman to carry their rapist's child to term, and then having it adopted is not the better option. I've already spoken at length about how the trauma of being forced to carry the child could harm the rape victim many times more than the rape itself. But even after the child is born, the rapist could then step in to legally block the adoption. This would drag the victim into court to face her attacker again, and he could legally contact and intrude into her life for years following, as court battles and appeals go on and on. If she loses the battle and he gets custody, then for the rest of her life, her rapist could intrude into her life at his whim. Even worse, she might be forced to pay child support for the next couple decades. Put yourself in her shoes for just a minute. A man violently forces sex upon you without your will. You are then forced to suffer physically, mentally and financially as you struggle through pregnancy with the child you never asked for. You are then forced into a lengthy and expensive court battle to try and get the child into adoption. Finally, you are forced to pay money to your rapist for the next 18 years, all because he raped you. The lack of control and hopelessness of ever having freedom would (and does) force many to suicide.For a rape victims to heal, they need to know they are safe, that they finally have some control over their life after having all control violently taken from them. As long as the aftermath of the rape removes some control from their life, it is impossible for them to heal. And they deserve the right to heal, just as much as the baby deserves the right to life.3. In the cases where the birth of the child would cause immense suffering or death to othersThis scenario pertains the the debate as it is another example of a situation in which abortion is moral. What we call 'superstition' and 'paranoia' today, was once considered undeniable fact. In those societies, in those times, if a parent truly believed that the birth of their child would bring suffering or death to others, then I assert that it was moral for them to abort the child.Although it is hard to come up with an example of this in the present day, there is one scenario I can think of that would qualify under this banner. If a mother's children or loved ones were being held hostage, and the hostage taker threatened to kill them all unless she aborted the baby she was carrying, then I do not believe it would be wrong of her to abort her child to save those she loved. It's an extreme example, however since the argument we are debating states, in no unclear terms, "Outside of endangerment of the mother's life abortion is completely immoral", any other moral example, even an extreme one, would counter the original argument.