Life does not begin at conception:

First off, the Koran is not the Word of God (1). That Bible is. What the Koran says is irrelevant to moral, ethical living. The Manufacturer of the universe (God) wrote a user's manual (the Bible) for the proper use of His creation. The closer you follow that user's manual, the better your life will be. The less you follow the instructions in that user's manual, the worse your life is. You are incorrect. The genetic structure of the umbilical cord and the placenta are identical to the baby's genetic structure. They are not part of the mother; they are part of the baby's body. (2) My father was circumcised when he was in his 50s due to medical necessity. By his own admission, his enjoyment of sexual intercourse was not diminished in the least after the procedure. Animals can be taught in terms of conditioned responses, and some "higher" animals may have limited decision making processes, but they are not capable of "reason". And even if they could, they do not have a living soul. Man is the only "animal" that God created that has an immortal, living soul (Gen 1:26, Gen 2:7). I love it when someone who does not believe in the Bible tries to use it as a reference. They almost always take a passage out of context, twist the meaning to represent something they are trying to say, and therefore come to wrong conclusions. Numbers 5 has nothing whatsoever to do with abortion. It is talking about the potential unfaithfulness of a wife. It does not condone the murder of an unborn child. The passage addresses a man who believes his wife has been sexually unfaithful with another man. It says that he is to take his wife to the priest who will give her a cup of water with dust in it. God will then judge her, and if she was unfaithful the water will turn to a poison (by God's power), if she remains faithful then the water will be sweet to her taste and do her no harm. This is God's judgement, not man's. The second passage cited, Exodus 12:29, refers again to God's judgement. The problem most people have with death is that what we think of as death is not significant to God. God is concerned with the soul, not the body. The people who died in Exodus 12 were already lost spiritually, and God simply took their physical life (which He gave them in the first place) and sent them to Hell. Those first born who lived were righteous in His sight, and thus were allowed to keep their physical life a little longer. Again, this is God's judgement. If a baby had a mutation that caused it to have no brain, it would die on its own. There are numerous pregnancies that end in miscarriage due to mutation that is incompatible with life. A child with no brain would be a mutation that is incompatible with life, therefore it would die on its own. There is no need to "abort" it. Just because a brain has not developed yet is not an excuse to kill the child. As Pro said in an earlier round, the brain does not develop in the child until about 19 to 20 week. That does not mean that the baby was not alive before that. Any "failed attempt at creating a baby" will result in a natural miscarriage. It is immoral to kill that child. I submit that Pro's final few arguments are not relevant to the debate on whether life begins at conception or not. I will answer them in a comment, but do not feel that they in any way support this debate, therefore I will not answer them as part of the debate. References: 1. http://crossexamined.org... 2. https://en.wikipedia.org...