I am neither pro-choice nor pro-life.

First Point Addressed: One of the issues I see with your statements on mandatory abortion , is you failed to define disfigurement a birth mark or a lump on the head could be considered disfigurement.. In which case you would be killing most babies.Rebuttal to Con: I define as if any limb or aspect of the body whatsoever is so severely disfigured that physical apparatus, such as a walking stick or such, are required to undergo daily life. Example conditions would be cerebral palsy and Downs syndrome (that face and their motor skills are physical disfigurements). While cerebral palsy is arguably not 100% genetic a slight link has been shown for vulnerability to it and genetic lines [http://cerebralpalsy.org...]. Aside from this is the fact that a weak parent is a bad parent and often will keep claiming child and/or disability benefits from the State and then use that money more on their own health than the well-being of their children.Reinforcement of Pro: If a physically disfigured individual gets raped, or successfully rapes, and has a child as a results of this I'd be proud to say they have either combined their genes with a strong-gene partner (in the case of being raped) or proven themselves to be one despite their disfigurement (in the case of raping). If they are then sneaky enough to avoid being caught until the child is born, there is nothing further the state can do and I'd happily admit defeat to both their sexual prowess and cunning.Second point addressed: I also find your statement on killing the mentally challenged disturbing since I find all babies are mentally challenged.Rebuttal to Con: I never once said I'd abort the retards or mentally challenged babies, I said I'd force mentally retarded or disfigured adults to abort their baby. you are creating a strawman argument.Reinforcement of Pro: If you read the sentence carefully 'I support mandatory abortions for retards and physically disfigured individuals.' does not in any way refer to the baby but to the mother and/or father that contributed to make that child. I am making it mandatory for them o abort it, not for the baby to be aborted; this is twisting words.Third point addressed: With consensual sex enforced the females get to chose her partners and will more likely pick a faster stronger smarter male over one who lacks said attributes.Rebuttal to Con: Women do not tend to care about this at all. If you actually research the female sexual psychology they go for irrational things such as 'confidence' and/or 'sweetness' depending on her type.Reinforcement of Pro: By legalizing rape and outlawing consensual sex I force genuine genetic dominance to prevail in the genetic line of the human beings of the state in which my laws are enacted.Fourth Point Addressed: While with rape enforced females have little choice and can be forced upon by weaker men in groups or with weapons, not only will this result in weaker genetics most the time but it will also result in a weaker upbringing of said child.Rebuttal to Con: This ensures that the men doing the rape are not just physically strong but are socially manipulative enough to get on in society and work in teams. I don't want some rogue who has physical strength to be chosen over a weaker but more socially capable man do I now? Think of society instead of muscle please!Reinforcement of Pro: The 'weaker upbringing' argument is totally invalid. Ina society where rape is the only legal form of sexual reproduction, the entire society and strategies of upbringing would revolve around single mothers making the most of what they've got. I'd happily start programs and such, government-funded if need be to assist poor women and rape victims (of which there'd be enough to vote in favor of the public funding of such an institution) and make it a popular, excellent program.Fifth Point Addressed: Legal rape doesn't sound so appealing with a ripped rectum now, does it?Rebuttal to Con: This would count as blatant assault to the anus for no procreation-based reason whatsoever and would not be solely rape but fundamentally aggravated assault, which would be illegal in my state.Reinforcement of Pro: Rape is not same thing as assault. The assault must be solely to assist the rape, nothing more.