is abortion moral

before I begin my spell check program was stuffing up and also sorry for me jumbling up my arguments I made three different copies of my debate and put them together only to find there was a very small character limit and im con your pro okay you seem to get this mixed up a bit. First of all, I am not all knowing { thank God} and the sources of my adoption argument were a bit off and I concede that when I did more digging into the matter and found the numbers a bit different. While I concede this point adoption is an option and should be considered way before abortion especially if you can not afford the child. Now on the point of is the fetus alive. Pro makes the same gigantic assumption that I have that the fetus is not alive and feels no pain and has no intrinsic value as pro stated "Without verbal reports and direct access to the mind of a fetus, inferences about what fetuses are able to experience depends on the interpretation of secondary evidence. I absolutely agree on that. let me give you a hypertheal situation you see something on the road that looks like a jacket but could be a homeless person you would probably swerve to edge on the side of caution just to be safe so if you didn't know if a fetus was human or not you probably wouldn't kill it. unless pro can prove with conclusive evidence that that fetus can not feel pain I feel that I win this point because without evidence "Without verbal reports and direct access to the mind of a fetus, inferences about what fetuses are able to experience depending on the interpretation of secondary evidence. As clearly stated by pro there is no first-hand evidence so It is Clearly not moral to kill the baby. pro asks con for evidence on why fetus equals human life well I assume pro was once a fetus and never stopped being human offspring and has just grown a bit.And pro is using a deductive argument which is only right if the fact claimed at the start is correct which is false because. the fetus is human and in fact alive and not impossible to prove as pro states because I'm alive and kicking and human from the start and didn't change to being a human. So in conclusion Things, pro needs to answer at what stage does it become murder to kill a fetus.is it when the mother wants to give birth if not is it worthless there needs to be a clear line drawn by pro. is the fetus any less alive than it was the day before seeing that pro has already conceded the fact that life begins at conception 'While I concede that life does begin at conception, life is not equal to human life' how is it not pro was once a fetus and hasn't got more or less alive. And in answer to pros claims that A fetus isn't a baby, nor is abortion execution. Even if we make the false assumption that a fetus is a human, it in no way fits the definition of execution, nor is it a baby If it isn't human which you haven't proven how is it not execution it's human but helpless? And lastly if the fetus is not human pro is a fetus outside the womb and so am I by pros reasoning so is it moral to kill a baby 2 minutes before it is born no what about a month before that no you study the stages and draw the line where it is human or not and if you were dying and on life support you would not be living independently would that mean your not human because your not living indepinley on no point has pro-proven his claims only reasons to abort the baby for all of his modern medical research it's hard to argue with stats but he didn't give any. Follow the links which will include evidence and statement from world-famous scientists bottom link is most informative so to end I think we should go by the old value innocent until proven guilty alive until proven dead which pro can't do. http://www.doctorsonfetalpain.com... http://www.bigccatholics.com... please watch http://naapc.org...