The Bible supports the pro-life cause.

This is the shortest conclusion I've ever written. But I don't have to write one any longer because my opponent has begged the question and followed red-herrings without upholding his BOP. Refer to the paragraph starting with the quotation, "Weather or not an unborn..." To read exactly why I say this."We do not have precedent for God killing innocent children and human-law innocents." This is just absolutely untrue as stated in the verses above. God kills children, the firstborn in Egypt, calls for miscarriages and curses wombs. Now who is twisting the bible like a pretzel? It is telling that he didn't give any examples. Are we reading the same debate? I did give examples of genocide (which includes children and babies and pregnant mothers) I did give examples of infanticide and the killing of firstborn in Egypt. They're in the above rounds. So this statement is just false. You must read passages in context for their meaning, not just pull one or a few verses out of context to support your contention. I agree wholeheartedly. I am not the one with the BOP in this debate, you are. And as of yet you haven't been able to pull any verses out purporting pro-choice. I have already explained why the Bible's silence on abortion does not condone it. And here we reach the crux of the matter. You're right, the bible's silence on an issue doesn't necessarily mean it supports that issue. Unfortunately, you are the one that said the bible is 'pro-choice,' implying that it does support anti-abortion sentiment. YOU are the one with the BOP, not me. Except you have yet to prove that through anything beyond begging the question. If the bible is silent on the issue, then how do you expect to prove it either way? You assume that a fetus is a human and then go onto tack verses to it. We have the legal system for that. They say don't kill, don't murder don't commit infanticide. We don't need the bible to tell us that. And one thing the bible doesn't say is that a fetus is equated to a human. Whether or not the unborn human is actually a child is irrelevant -- the Bible considers it as such. IT IS NOT IRRELEVANT. Your entire debate hinges upon this point and you haven't given any verses to support this wild assertion. You could have mentioned, 'he knitted us together in our mother's womb,' or something along those lines, but you didn't. You begged the question. You assumed your answer. You can't just say, 'the bible considers it as such.' It is your BOP to prove that and allow me a chance for rebuttal. But as you haven't even tried to prove that there's really no point in me continuing this debate. I could concede all arguments leading up to this point and still win. I could say all of what you said is true except about fetus' being human and I'd win this debate, because you haven't proven anything remotely near the assertion that they are. I don't concede any of my arguments though. Because my arguments are the only sound proof showing that God is violent. He does commit abortions. He does, at least in some circumstances, order genocide and waste to a land. Call it judgment, call it love. Either way it doesn't support my opponent's 'pro-choice' assertion about the bible. None of these arguments have supported a 'pro-choice' bible if we don't just assume that a fetus is a human. If we do though, then the entire debate is pretty much moot isn't it? I don't assume it. I reject that premise and it was my opponent's burden to support it. He hasn't upheld his BOP. Instead he's begged the question.