Keeping The Pro-Life Movement Alive

National Review: On Roe's Anniversary, A Call To Keep Fighting

(National Review Online)  This column was written by Nikolas T. Nikas.

---

First they ignore you.
Then they ridicule you.
Then they fight you.
Then you win.

This insightful observation of Mahatma Gandhi reveals a truth about social-reform movements — that it takes perseverance to achieve victory.

Ending the darkness of Roe v. Wade is not only possible, it is more than likely to occur if those who understand what's at stake don't give up, having tired of the seemingly long battle.

For, as social-reform movements go, the 34-year struggle to overturn Roe and its judicial progeny is still a relatively young one.

The lessons of the long struggle for black civil rights are instructive. From the advent of the first African slave being taken to the American colonies in 1619 to the beginning of the Civil War was a period of 246 years. The cause for life is, in comparison, only 34 years old.

The ratification of the 13th Amendment abolishing slavery in 1865 to the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964 was a period of approximately 100 years. We who fight for life having been laboring for only one third as long.

From the announcement in 1896 by the Supreme Court in Plessy v. Ferguson that "separate but equal" public accommodations for blacks and whites was constitutional to the reversal of that decision by the same Supreme Court in 1954 in the Brown v. Board of Education case was a period of 58 years — almost a quarter of a century longer than our present struggle.

The period from the Civil Rights Amendment in 1964 to the present is approximately 42 years, eight years longer than we have presently struggled. The lesson is that American social-reform movements sometimes take time. We will win the battle to overturn Roe if we do not lose heart.

But as we maintain a long-term vision, we must also come to terms with today's brutal facts. The numbers are staggering and so, sometimes, is the temptation to despair. As we soberly mark the 34th anniversary of the judicial atrocity known as Roe v. Wade, the sheer number of innocent victims of that act of judicial tyranny overwhelms our everyday experience.

Even under the most conservative of estimates (and we lack certainty because we do not have a national, uniform mandatory abortion reporting requirement), somewhere between 40 million and 50 million unborn children have died under this nation's regime of abortion.

To put that number in some context, the best estimate is that the total war dead, of all causes, for all of America's major and minor wars since 1775 is 1,329,991 or an amount equal to just one year of Roe's infernal tally.

It is true that a prudent, incremental strategy of judicial, legislative, and public media efforts, including test cases, test legislation, and consistent public education, have led to noticeable gains in reducing the number of abortions and educating the public (and perhaps, soon, ending the legal support of partial-birth infanticide).

However, the relentless daily, monthly and annual toll of unborn lives lost, mothers and fathers physically and emotionally devastated, and cultural and political disunity of the country, leads many to wonder if the fight, after so many years of battling, is really winnable.

Can we honestly expect things to change when so many lives have been lost, so many families affected, so many legal battles and legislative arguments made and ignored, so much money spent and so many years of our lives gone by?

The answer is a resounding "yes." Positive signs are all around us.

The ever more detailed pictures of unborn babies in the womb manifest their humanity in ways that only the most hardened can deny. More young adults and high school students are pro-life than ever before. The accumulating weight of serious medical studies details the truth conclusively that abortion, in addition to killing her unborn child, is harmful to the woman who subjects herself to it.

On the legal front there are also hopeful signs. In addition to new principled justices, at no time in the last 34 years has the Supreme Court ever found a solid constitutional basis for the so-called "right to terminate a pregnancy."

Combine this with the equally revealing, albeit maddening, point that the Supreme Court conceded in the Casey decision 19 years after Roe — that no single constitutional argument standing alone could buttress the "right" to abort (i.e., without the added legal doctrine of stare decisis abortion jurisprudence is a house of cards) — and the overturning of Roe is inevitable.

Ultimately, the realization that the radical ideology behind the abortion industry is bankrupt morally, culturally, economically, and spiritually will lead to the collapse of the current abortion regime, just as surely as the deadly decay and false reality of Marxism led to the fall of the Soviet Union. All this is the good news if we just keep up the struggle.

[bluestardad]

this is a distraction wedge issue

[jimfinster]

The U.S. seems crowded as is. Open spaces are disappearing at an alarming rate. The roads are clogged at all hours of the day and night. Competition for available housing has caused home prices to skyrocket. Available resources are being consumed at unsustainable rates.

Aside from the moral issue, do we really want another 50 million people?!?

[global_chick]

Do you people hear yourselves?

We live in a world that is beyond sick. How can anyone think it is "OK" to suck a baby from the womb with a vacuum (fully-formed, mind you) then stab it in the back of the head with a pair of scissors to finish it off? That's bad enough, but it's even worse that people think this is acceptable if it is for the sake of "convenience" or to avoid "overcrowding."

And lest you think unborn children are nothing but a "mass of tissue" or "glob of cells," you are in serious denial. Look up some pictures of aborted babies sometime and get the story Planned Parenthood doesn't want you to hear.

[jimfinster]

global_chick:

You are talking late-term abortion. I agree that is inhumane and should not be done.

Do you have an issue with very early term abortion, say in the first 2 weeks? If so, why?

[ki8911]

If the pro-life people were truly committed to saving "the unborn" they would step up to the plate and 1)pay for the doctor & hospital bills for the woman and 2)adopt the child themselves regardless of race or health considerations. But I never hear any of them offering that option. The other alternative is for inexpensive contraceptives for all women. Again, though that would be wrong, because that means women would be out there having ***.
Legal abortion drives the ultra-right religious sects crazy because it deprives them of the ability to control women. Women are still viewed in many countries as having the value of a brood mare & packhorse. These medieval minded ministers of "morality" want to send women back to a time where there were no safe options. This includes women who maybe in their late forties, have a family and neither spouse wish to risk having another child they cannot take care of, nor the potential health risks for the mother and child.
If you don't like abortions, then don't have one. Men don't have to worry about pregnancy. They can split. Of course, not all men are cowards. It is just that it is the woman who has to endure.

[marcodele]

Bluestar: I agree it is a distraction issue, and certainly will be in 2008 when once again the "pro-life" vote will probably result in another 100,000 plus Iraqi civilian deaths.

Abortion, flag-burning, gay marriage, family values; the republicans sure know how to bait and hook, don't they?

Nobody is FOR abortion. But making it illegal will only make it unsafe again, and it certainly won't stop abortions. I just wish the folks who are so violently opposed to abortion would consider adopting one of the over 200,000 children looking for foster homes. Then perhaps their so called pro-life stand wouldn't seem so hypocritical.

[linfinster]

Abortion is not justified by saying that all those unborn children will cost money. How sick. The POINT is that it is murder and the injury done to women physically and phychologically is a more serious issue, by far. ALL the money poured into this issue by both side could be better used to educate and prevent unwanted pregnancies. Just got to use our brains instead of our s*X organs.

[global_chick]

Let me ask this of those who support abortion: If a woman gives birth to a child, then decides to throw it in the dumpster or leave it out in the snow to die, do you have a problem with that? If you do, then you would be in the camp of hypocrite. Both kill an innocent child. The child doesn't care if they were killed by a "doctor" or by their own mother. They're still dead.

[jimfinster]

For those anti-abortionist out there;

First guarantee that the baby will have a good home. Set up a fund, and pay the mother for her time during the pregnancy. Pay all medical bills. Pay all post-partum care needed. Then place the baby, and provide all financial costs until the age of 21. Provide a waiver to the mother that she will NEVER have a financial or legal obligation for the child. Advertise the program on a national basis. This must be privately funded, not a govt program.

When you do that, you will have my respect. Until that time, GO AWAY.

[russellvbrla]

I gotta admit: I have been and always will be conflicted on this one. I personally don't think a woman should have an abortion unless of course to save that woman's life. But I also don't like the idea of a government, particularly one ruled by extreme religious dogma, forcing a woman (or girl) to have a baby and then pretty much ignoring the baby afterwards. That is tantamount to saying that it is ok to rape a female and force her to give birth against her will.
All I do know is that I'm a man and will never have to deal with abortion personally so I shouldn't be telling women and girls to give birth. But it would be nice to live in a society where every child is wanted. Unfotunately, that society does not exist. Never has, and much to my dismay, never will.

[bluestardad]

This is like the Republicans anti gay platform on the Religious right then find out some Multi Millionare TV Evanglist is Smoking the Sausage of a male Prostitute while he is making ground for the Republican party from the pulpits of his church.

[bluestardad]

It is a hard decision but it has to stay legal! i do not know of anyone who takes this issue lightly when faced with it.

[global_chick]

Day 1 - conception takes place.
7 days - tiny human implants in mother%u2019s uterus.
10 days - mother%u2019s menses stop.
18 days - heart begins to beat.

I cannot in good conscience advocate the stopping of another human's heart for "monetary reasons." If this were true, I guess we should kill the homeless and the poor, followed by senior citizens who rely on Social Security. Next to get the axe are those on welfare or any form of public assistance. They're draining coffers, and since I as a middle-class American cannot support them myself, they need to go. Am I right?

There are NUMEROUS pro-life organizations which will guide a mother through the process of giving a child up for adoption at low or no-cost. If that's not possible, many states now have laws which allow a mother to drop a child off at a hospital or fire station without consequence. But, people would rather kill the child altogether than examine their options.

[getcentered]

Two problems I have with the "right to life folks":

1. Mind YOUR OWN business!!
If you think for one second that the decision to have an abortion is an easy one for a woman, then you are either a religious nutcase, and/or a self-righteous male. People opposing abortion don't see this as a class issue, but it is. Here's one example:

Most crimes are committed by males of the average age of 18 that come from lower class backgrounds.
Roughly 18 years after Roe v. Wade, which gave mothers the right to CHOOSE to have an abortion, CRIME RATES PLUMMETED.


2.
Right to life people are one sided in their arguments about the "rights" of innocent life.

They think life begins at conception and ends at birth.

Meaning, I don't hear anyone who opposes abortion crying out about the 100,000 or so innocent Iraqi civilians killed by the US military involvement there.

[jimfinster]

global_chick:

The main reason for abortion is FINANCIAL. Put your money where your mouth is.

[saransk]

More from self-rightous white men trying to force their religous morals on everyone. If mem could get pregnant this would never had been an issue. Whether Christianity believes or not, it has not right to force what is a religous conviction on the majority of those who either by gender or religion do not believe that life begins at conception and that a fetus has the same rights as a born individual.
The issue is not that anyone is for abortions - it is for individual rights that outweigh the religous convictions of a minority.

Why do those so against abortion also are just as against birth-control and ***-education that could prevent pregnancies.

[saransk]

A second comment
I personally am against abortion as birth control. But this issue has not allowed for any "grey" areas or discussion. Should abortion be available for any women who has been raped, pregnant by incest, or if the life of the mother is in doubt - without any limitations. Should a minor child be allowed to get an abortion without some adult guidence (use a court appointed guardian if need) - I don't think so (children can't get any other surgical proceedure). Should we take a look at what our children need to know to avoid this issue - without moral judgements - absolutely. Yet believeing in this middle ground get a person slammed. The Anti-Abortion crowd wants no obortions at all - without reguard for the emotional pain (how would you like it if your daughter was having a relative's or rapist's child and was reminded of that for 9 months). Yet those for individual rights can't seem to allow a discussion of the need for some rational limitations to protect those who are seeking this proceedure. And we nned to address even more - why anyone has an unwanted pregnacy these days.

[gmcnally2]

This is not about money. To ask for a guarantee of a good home and education from the adoptive family is ludicrous. Who here would rather be dead than under-educated? Who would rather kill their child than see it in a 'bad' home? It costs nothing for a mother to give up her baby, and if they are like my wife they could do it all and miss very little work. Also, there is such a huge demand for babies that many couples are adopting them from overseas. The kids that are in foster care are older and not as desirable. But any healthy baby can be adopted in a second.

[fascistusa]

Pro-Life?

THEN STOP LORD BUSH'S WARS.

STOP THE SLAUGHTER OF OUR US SOLDIERS.

STOP THE SLAUGHTER OF IRAQIS.

STOP THE FASCIST REGIME.

[superdem]

There is no Right to Life - this is a hysterical human construct. A woman's choice is sancrosanct, her health issues must be between her and her doctor. PERIOD. I don't see the Right to Life movement rescuing and providing for every kid out of every institution, or putting themselve on the line to feed and educate the poor cast off souls of our society. It's easy to march to congress with roses every year, or picket clinics with photos of dead babies. Meanwhile, the world groans under the weight of the human race. The oceans are depleted of fish, the great animals have nowhere to live. The Right to Life movement is the Kill the Planet movement.

[marcodele]

I think the abortion issue is a non-issue that the republican candidates toss out to their neocon lemmings who fall for it hook, line and sinker everytime. Of course, the politicians never do anything about it once they get the votes, but its a clever way to get votes for the wrong reasons from people voting irrationally.

[dallison7]

To all ladies out there,

If you lived under a strict, fundalmentist, Islamic regime you would be required to completely cover your face when in public because that is what you should do, based on their religious beliefs. If you chose not to follow their beliefs you would be forced. There are millions of American men and women who do not share the belief that a tiny specimen of tissue is equal to a living, breathing, thinking human. These people believe it is wrong to place more value on this piece of tissue than the quality of life of a functioning human being. No matter how strongly you believe in an issue, wether you follow christian, muslim or any other doctrine, you do not have the right to force your beliefs on those who believe differently. I have never heard of an abortion advocate attempting to force a pro-life advocate to have an abortion... same thing.

[lambofgoth]

If "All life is sacred" then these fools really need to stop taking antibiotics.

Some idiot is posting about how baby's heart is beating at 18 days. It wouldn't survive without the mother's body. Neither would a tapeworm.

Keep Bush out of mine.

[mgpm-2009]

I believe life begins at conception. I'm against abortion. But I can't see anything the right has done, really, in the last thirty five years to radically reduce abortions or eliminate them. (With the exception of Carter and Clinton, the presidencies have all been thiers during that time!) The only thing the right does is to the the pro life vote. Bush couldn't even be bothered to make an appearance today at the rally in DC. Too busy counting the dead in Iraq I guess. It most definitely is NOT an issue the right really gives a flying fig about and it's about time the American public figures it out. The Dems ought to figure it out too, and talk about ways to REDUCE the NEED for abortions, ie. health care, supports for women and families, etc. That would make sense.

[global_chick]

My point has been proven: We live in a society where not only time, but now people, are money. Children are no longer valued. Instead they are seen as a hindrance, a financial burden to be done away with, and a "political tool" or a "wedge issue." The vast majority of you on this board represent, in my opinion, everything that is wrong with society: it has a black soul. That's because it's all about "me, me, me" and to hell with you if you get in my way. It's all about my political views, and to hell with you if you get in my way. It's about some supposed "right" to murder a child. Where is that in the Constitution?

It's no longer about a child (and yes, it is clearly a child, if you have actually seen any photos of a developing fetus). I only hope that in time we can all see the error of that way.

Stop thinking about yourselves for once and think about the child. This isn't about "beliefs": It's about whether or not it is right to cut up a tiny human. I'm willing to bet that most of you on here who are pro-abortion have never seen a picture of a butchered fetus. I dare you to look one up and see if it affects you in any way.

[marcodele]

What has any voter gained by voting for the so called pro-life candidate? Did any one of them try to outlaw abortions?

Don't waste your votes on these snake oil salesmen. Even if abortion was illegal many women would still choose to have them.

Nobody is for abortion. But a majority of people are for a woman's choice about her own reproductive options.

[lfitts1]

First of all it is NOT A PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT--it is the antiabortion movement.

Second--no one makes these decisions lightly--but like free speech it is a slippery slope to try to control someone elses body

Third--no one is FOR abortion--it is not like apple pie--it is more like taxes--a necessary evil.

Most antiabortionists think life begins at conception and end at birth--they are unwilling to commit the resources to give quality to those born. Making the decison to have an abortion is a difficulat one and one that is made for a myriad of reasons--birth control failed, genetic abnormalities, lacking the resources to raise and feed another mouth. This 'straw man' of "partial birth abortion" is just that. That is a medical procedure that is done specificly when large abnormailities are seen in the fetus late in gestation--anencephaly(basicly no brain).

As a physician--the choice of medical procedures is between a patient and the doctor--not the state legislature--they don't tell doctors whether to do an appendectomy laporoscopicly or open--the legislature has no standing in this devbate--keep laws out of patients rights.

The other interesting thing is that the Republicans are amazing adept at pushing hot button issues in order to hide their lack of ideas in all other facets of running the country. They are morally bankrupt, but yell family values from the rafters--don't get sucked in!!!

[mgpm-2009]

I agree with you, Global Chick. I have four children. My third child I almost lost at 11 weeks, I started to miscarry. I had to stay in bed the remainder of the pregnancy or I'd certainly lose the baby. I had a 50 50 chance at best the dr. said. With God's help, I had him, and he's 6 now. He began reading at age 2, he writes his own songs...he's gifted. I often wonder what my life would be like with out him. I also wonder what treasures are thrown away every single day.
I can't help but believe abortion is a crime against nature.

But the people who claim to be champions against it are not champions against it. I don't believe them. I don't believe GWB cares. He doesn't have a conscience.

[mgpm-2009]

I think the Pro Life movement would do better to get out of the trying to make abortion illegal arena and start trying to make abortion less attractive. Help families, give support to women, provide B/C, education, give better advice to our young people.

[global_chick]

With all due respect, I have a problem when people sugarcoat abortion with words that would appear positive: Let's be clear: It's not a "choice" and it's not a "reproductive decision." Choices and decisions are what you make when deciding what shirt to wear or what car drive. Abortion is "I don't want a child, so I am going to pay someone to off it." Plain and simple.

[global_chick]

I'm not sure why the President keeps coming up in this discussion. What he did or did not do is beside the point, in my opinion. The question should be, is abortion wrong or not, and should it be overturned?

[marcodele]

Kudos to lfitss' post. In their attempt to impersonate morally mature people, the Republicans diagnosed Terry Shiavo from a videotape in D.C. Jeb Bush started his short-lived presidential campaign by claiming he saw Terry Schiavo make eye contact. This is the tragedy we get when we let politicians interfere in family's personal and moral health care choices.

Of course, the scientists' autopsy proved poor Terry Shiavo was brain dead long ago, while the politicians in D.C. and the Florida governor's mansion batted her around like an electoral ping pong ball.

Those are your "family values" "Pro-life" polticians - otherwise known as Charletons.
Keep them out of my body, away from my physician, and please, keep your vote out of their pockets. Don't let them take a political office based on one small emotional issue when there are thousand of more important issues that could result in the loss of millions of lives.

[lfitts1]

The problem is highlighted by mgpm--"with gods help"--that is by definition a religious debate--keep god out of legislation and out of government--believe as you wish--just don't force me to accept the same.

[global_chick]

mgpm -- that's awesome about your son...he sounds like a great kid. : )

[marcodele]

The answer is always somewhere in between the extremly polarized political camps.

"is abortion wrong or not, and should it be overturned?"

Overturning Roe vs. Wade will not stop abortions.
Neither will you. If you don't like abortions, don't have one, teach your kids not to have one.
Outside of that, its really not your business what another woman does with her pregnancy.

[jimfinster]

This is a sincere moral issue for many people. Unfortunately, the Republicans have cynically used it for many years to manipulate their party members. And it has served them well.

It is hard to see it as anything but a political arguement now.

[marcodele]

It is a sincere moral issue, yes, just like the "right to die with dignity" and Christian Science in medical care of children. Should government interfere with the Christian Scientists who chose to let their child die rather than have a blood transfusion? Ditto with Jehovahs. Isn't that murder by the pro-life movement's standards? Why are they not pursuing those people?

[jimfinster]

marcodele:

Yes, I suspect most of the same anti-abortionists would also oppose our right to die at the time of our own choosing. They clearly are approaching this from a religious, "I know better than you do" position of moral crusading.

[afmca]

I work in DC and walked through Union Station where a lot of the kids who took the day off school were gathered waiting for their various rides back home. Even though in middle and high school, the children I saw were neither mature enough nor did they have enough life experience to really know the true issues that they were supposedly supporting (they were great at impeding people trying to get to their trains). They were just blindly mimicking what a teacher or religious leader had told them to spout (or better yet, it was a free day off). I really doubt that these kids (most from preppy private schools) have had to make many difficult life decisions to know what they are or are not supporting. I find the bipartisan group in Congress that is finally going to propose real legislation to deal with the #1 cause of abortion - unwanted pregnancies %u2013 really exciting. If the many legislators and citizens gets out of their fantasy land expectations and support honest *** education, unbiased abstinence education and eventually free and universally available birth control then abortion would really be a rare and last ditch medical procedure. Unfortunately if that would occur, the religious zealots would only have gay-bashing left to get all sanctimonious about.

[lpar26]

I was waiting at a red light behind a car that had a pro-life bumper sticker. Next to us was a woman holding up a sign "I'm homeless. Please help me feed my 6 kids." Did the pro-lifer do the "moral" thing and give her money? Of course not.

[humansmatter]

I believe the life of every human being, including yours, is precious and deserves legal protection. No magic happens at birth that turns a non-human "thing" into a human being. All of you who favor allowing the killing of prenatal babies, and who act as if you are simply reasoning from scientific principles, tell me exactly how your birth turned you into a human being. If you were not a living human being before you were born, tell me to which species you belonged! Admit the truth: abortion kills a living human being.

[ejryan2]

Howcome we never hear pro-abortion people talking about abortion itself? Howcome all they talk about is choice, womens' rights, birth control, etc. ad nauseum? Oh yeah, I remember why: abortion is an ugly thing. Intentional murder of human beings is ugly, disgusting, nothing anyone would claim to support. Choice??? What about the choice of the human being whose life is ended by abortion? Get a clue.

[bmadeline-2009]

Pro-Life....Such words form war mongers.

[afmca]

I could make the same comment to EJRyan2 - what real solutions do the anti-choice movement offer? Outlaw abortions and in their mindset the problem is solved. I was living prior to Rowe and believe me abortions were illegal BUT they were still happening. The rich and connected still had access to safe abortions; only the poor, uneducated, and scared were forced to back alley butchers. All Rowe did was even the field so everyone had the same access to the same SAFE medical procedures. Repeal Rowe and we just go back to the same pre-Rowe world where the connected get their safe abortions and the rest take their chances. If you are truely pro-life your advocacy needs to start with the fetue, but also continue to their post-birth reality. Are you willing to provide for adequate nourishment, housing, educational opportunities, medical care, etc? If you are going to force the mother to give birth, then you are morally responsible for giving that child all the opportunities and financial backing they need to succeed. If not, back off!

[rafterman1]

"Howcome all they talk about is choice, womens' rights, birth control, etc. ad nauseum?"

Because it IS about choice. I know a lot of women who believe in choice, but wouldn't get an abortion for themselves. It is a decision htey make for themselves, but will not make it for others.

"Intentional murder of human beings is ugly, disgusting, nothing anyone would claim to support"

Well, 30% of this country currently supports it in Iraq. I'll bet a good percentage of that 30% also backs banning abortions, which is an ultimate hypocracy. How many innocent Iraqis have died due to the actions of people who, incidently, find abortion repugnant, yet support policies of war that kill innocents all the time?

[grumpas]

humansmatter: I for one am sick to death of having self righteous people like yourself shove their religious belief's down my throat!!!! If you don't want an abortion, you have the right to not get one! End of story! Where do you come off assuming you know what is right for every woman in this country????? That is the height of arrogance and the last I knew God hates arrogance! I do not not view the fetus in the womb as being a human life until after it is born! Whether I am right or wrong is immaterial! It's my belief and I have as much right to it as people like you do! But, you are bound determined to see my rights taken away from me so they fit your rigid religious belief's! You may accomplish this! But I don't think people like you have ever once stopped to think about the end results of what you are proposing! The bottom line is we are over-populating ourselves into oblivion! It has reached a critical stage where if something isn't done to reverse the trend we are going to destroy this world for everyone! I simply do not believe this is what God ever intended! He didn't give us this world to destroy with arrogance and ignorance! But, that is what the Pro-life movement wants! You could do better to protest the slaughter of innocent human beings in Iraq by a madman!

[tjrc2767]

I am pro-life. This means standing up against abortion, which I proudly did yesterday, as well as standing up against capital punishment, euthanasia and the completely unjust war in Iraq. I talk with a lot of people who are hyper focused on why abortion is wrong but in the same breath talk about the need to increase the level of violence in Iraq. On the flip side are people who talk about how insane it to oppose abortion but support the war. I am endless perplexed how each side can see half an argument so clearly but not the whole. A fetus is a life in it's earliest stages but life none the less. Placing a mother's convenience or perceived independence over her child's life is morally wrong and void of any logical defense. I support a woman's choice to have full dominion over her body, as it pertains to itself,solely,not a separate entity growing within it. The choice is in a woman's hands as far as how to channel her passion and how to protect herself during their physical manifestations. A child/baby/fetus/grouping of cells that will soon be a baby is not a choice, it's a responsibility. Choose wisely or not, but don't cry that freedoms are compromised if a portion of society (hopefully one that is growing) forces you to be responsible for your choices.

[i-tack]

Arguing for/against abortion on an emotional level is a fool's errand because it stirs much inside a person's inner self (and I am not a lawyer, so I won't debate it as law). But on a national level...

Whether you believe abortion is a choice, or a right, or murder, look at the mess that open-abortion has created in Europe.

Declining populations unable to support their own social programs, requiring a huge influx of foreign nationals to prop up the tax base, which leads to national instability because of the clash of cultures.

I've witnessed this myself in Germany, Austria, Wales, England, etc.

[i-tack]

Rafterman1,

So based on your assessment, you could argue that there is hypocrisy in wanting to kill an unborn child who has harmed no one, but not an enemy combatant who is willing to harm others?

Your view of hypocrisy can be factual, but it is not exclusively truthful.

[humansmatter]

Grumpas (and others in favor of allowing abortion),
You didn't answer my question. Yes, it is very material as to whether the prenatal child killed by abortion is a living human being. Take your own words and substitute "fetus" for every other class of human beings who have been the victims of violent discrimination, "I do not believe X is a human being and I have a right to my belief."
Not when your belief seriously harms others and your belief is scientifically and logically wrong. What magic happened at your birth that turned you from a non-human "thing" into a human being? If you were not a living human being before you were born, tell me to which species you belonged! Admit the truth: abortion kills a living human being. The life of every human being is precious. All of us will die someday, but none of us should be deliberately killed.