[Spliffdaddy]

PIERRE, S.D. — The Legislature on Friday approved a ban on nearly all abortions in South Dakota, setting up a direct legal assault on Roe v. Wade.

The House passed the bill 50-18 on Friday. The Senate approved the measure 23-12 earlier this week.

Under the measure, doctors could get up to five years in prison for performing an illegal abortion.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,185991,00.html

One down, forty-nine to go.

Like I've been saying for years - I'll live to see the day when abortion is a crime.

Like slavery, we'll all look back and ask "wtf were we thinking".

[macintologist]

The law will be overturned

[Spliffdaddy]

There is no Constitutional right to an abortion. Roe v Wade will be overturned. The states will determine the legality of abortion.

the will of the American people shall prevail.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Like slavery, we'll all look back and ask "wtf were we thinking".

So will there be a civil war if some states keep it legal?

[macintologist]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

the will of the American people shall prevail.

A solid majority of Americans support upholding Roe v Wade. You're absolutely correct.

[Spliffdaddy]

We'll see who's right.

[forkies]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

We'll see who's right.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by macintologist

A solid majority of Americans support upholding Roe v Wade.

Not making any comments about this either way, but considering there are more women AGAINST abortion than for, got anything to back up such statements?

BTW "Roe" in the Roe vs Wade doesn't support it either.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

There is no Constitutional right to an abortion. Roe v Wade will be overturned. The states will determine the legality of abortion.

Exactly. While I fully support a woman's right to have an abortion it is a right that should be granted by a state government and not the federal government. I think the Supreme Court over-reached when they made their decision in Roe v. Wade. This issue should be decided at the state level.

Eventually we will have a country where some states completely outlaw abortion, some states partially outlaw it, and some states keep it completely legal. What the final breakdown will be is open to debate but I don't foresee a time when abortion becomes outlawed in all 50 states.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by subego

So will there be a civil war if some states keep it legal?

Quite possibly yes. I could see some states virulently opposed to the practice of abortion trying to force neighboring states to outlaw the practice which ends up in a form of small-scale civil war.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by subego

So will there be a civil war if some states keep it legal?

Of course not. It's a State's rights issue and the authority will be rightfully returned to the State. Some States may maintain legal abortions and that's fine.

[subego]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Quite possibly yes.

Originally Posted by ebuddy

Of course not.

Glad we solved that one.

[macintologist]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Not making any comments about this either way, but considering there are more women AGAINST abortion than for, got anything to back up such statements?

BTW "Roe" in the Roe vs Wade doesn't support it either.

So instead of giving me the benefit of the doubt (what any smart person would do), you'd prefer I bitchslapped you online when you doubted the authority of my post?








CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. Jan. 10-12, 2003. N=1,002 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.







WHO WANTS TO GET OWNED NEXT?

[ebuddy]

I love polls. I really do. The LA Times poll actually asked the question in a manner that would've provided the most thorough reply, but their demographic is anything, but reasonable. I'll see if I can dig up some polls when the question is really addressed. Most people don't even know what the hay ROE V WADE is. When asked more clearly, it is quite easy to see that the vast majority of Americans are opposed to abortion only with the exception of rape, incest, and health of mother.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by macintologist

So instead of giving me the benefit of the doubt (what any smart person would do),

Oh please, like people don't randomly make up stuff on the web.

you'd prefer I bitchslapped you online when you doubted the authority of my post?

Bitchslapped me?

Let me explain something to you. When you make a statement and someone asks you for a reference. They aren't telling you that you are wrong. They are asking to see proof to back such a thing up. You providing proof isn't a bitchslap. In any way. It's just attempting to back up your assertions. And cut out the silly pretentious act.

The fact still remains as to what I said

A majority of women, 54%, say abortion is morally wrong, while roughly a third (35%) say it is morally acceptable. Men are more evenly divided in their views of abortion, with 47% saying it is wrong and 45% saying it is acceptable. [May 2-5, 2005 Gallop poll]

Sorry that didn't work out the way you thought it was going to.

Pre-emptive bitch slapped revoked.

[Spliffdaddy]

Those were the same opinion polls that showed Kerry winning by 7%.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Kevin

The fact still remains as to what I said

However, you were implying your fact invalidated his, which doesn't seem the case, especially since I don't see how being morally opposed to abortion causes a direct correlation to whether one supports Roe v. Wade.

I'd go so far as to support a pro-choice constitutional amendment, that doesn't mean I think having an abortion is morally "right".

FWIW though, I don't think his attempted bitchslap was successful.

[Spliffdaddy]

He ducked the bitchslap?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by ebuddy

When asked more clearly, it is quite easy to see that the vast majority of Americans are opposed to abortion only with the exception of rape, incest, and health of mother.

That's completely irrelevant to the question at hand. I'm opposed to abortion in most cases as well, but I don't think it should be made illegal.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by subego

However, you were implying your fact invalidated his, which doesn't seem the case, especially since I don't see how being morally opposed to abortion causes a direct correlation to whether one supports Roe v. Wade.

No, I did not imply such a thing. I said I found it hard to believe considering MORE women are against it than not. I never said BECAUSE of that, what he said couldn't be true. I was just purely asking him for some proof.

I'd go so far as to support a pro-choice constitutional amendment, that doesn't mean I think having an abortion is morally "right".

My stance. People are going to do what they want regardless. It's part of free will.

I just wish people would stop using it as birth control, and actually admit to what they are actually doing instead of all this "feel good" terms they throw at you to sugar coat killing a living being.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

That's completely irrelevant to the question at hand. I'm opposed to abortion in most cases as well, but I don't think it should be made illegal.

I don't think it is IMHO. I'm not sure a great many even know the actual ROE V WADE conclusion Chuckit. It's clear from just about every poll I've seen that Americans while hesitant to call themselve Pro-Life do hold a Pro-Life position. The polls I've seen between those who strictly oppose abortion combined with those who oppose with the exception of rape, incest, and health of mother comprise an overwhelming majority generally opposed to abortion. Find any poll you wish. As it was in response to polling data, my point was entirely relevant.

Abortion will be severely regulated in S. Dakota and if it works its way through the Supreme Court, abortion will be severely regulated throughout most of the US. In the sense of the "free for all" currently in place, abortion is in trouble. No doubt about it. Leave it at the State level. Those who espouse points about smaller government with less interference should begin by removing legislation regarding abortion at the Federal level.

[Taliesin]

The topic of abortion is a pretty tricked one, a catch-catch-dilemma.

There are those people that view that abortions are mostly not right, but they also believe that the legal possibility to conduct an abortion should be available. The argument is that whatever is inside the body of a woman is hers anyway and she can do with it whatever she wants, and if she really wants abortion, she will find a way to abort, even if it were illegal, but on top risk to harm herselves in the illegal, and therefore uncontrolled and qualitatively weaker, abortion...

The major counterarguments are a) that what is inside a woman is not always hers and represents life of its own that has a right to live, ie. abortion would mean murder... , and b) that the legal possibility and easy access to abortion-facilities propagates and supports the idea of carefree and premarital as well as adultery sex, and poses therefore a direct threat for b)a)religious morality, espescially among easily impressable teenagers, and b)b) for the health of society, as premarital sex, adultery sex and the abortion-possibility lead to a degration of traditional families and their values and promote the lifestyle of singles and metrosexuals, which would ultimately lead to a major decline in reproduction..

My personal opinion is that abortion should be illegal, except for the case of raping or in the case that the birth would harm the health of the mother considerably.

The other cases that women accidentaly become pregnant but really don't want to rise a child, there should be an easy and efficient as well as anonymus way to give the child up for adoption.

Just my humble opinion.

Taliesin

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

The other cases that women accidentaly become pregnant but really don't want to rise a child, there should be an easy and efficient as well as anonymus way to give the child up for adoption.

47 states already have "safe haven" laws in which a mother can legally abandon a new born at certain places, like hospitals.

Doesn't get much easier than that.

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by smacintush

47 states already have "safe haven" laws in which a mother can legally abandon a new born at certain places, like hospitals.

Doesn't get much easier than that.

Yeah, nine months of pregnancy and a lifetime knowing you have a child is easy.

[chabig]

Originally Posted by Busemann

Yeah, nine months of pregnancy and a lifetime knowing you have a child is easy.

It's easier than knowing you had a child--and killed it.

[BRussell]

The Supreme Court won't touch this. It'll be shot down by the first court that sees it and then go nowhere after that, IMO.

But I personally wouldn't mind if Roe was overturned.

1. It would be the worst thing to happen to the Republican party. They've staked out such an extreme position to cater to the 15% of the country that agree with this S Dakota law, and the other 85% has ignored them because there was no danger of anything happening. If Roe was overturned, the 85% would give them quite the smack down.

2. A few states would outlaw abortion like S Dakota, and some more would make abortion more restrictive than today, but it would be legal in all but a few states.

3. We'd probably pass a constitutional amendment on the issue, setting a basic national standard (e.g., abortion legal in first 3 months, for serious health reasons, or rape). That would be a good thing and defuse a lot of silly political shenanigans occurring now.

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by chabig

It's easier than knowing you had a child--and killed it.

Yeah I'd think so. But is it easier than doing an early abortion?

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by BRussell

3. We'd probably pass a constitutional amendment on the issue, setting a basic national standard (e.g., abortion legal in first 3 months, for serious health reasons, or rape). That would be a good thing and defuse a lot of silly political shenanigans occurring now.

That would be a good thing, however it would require 3/4 of states to approve it, which will never happen, because both sides generally refuse to compromise on the issue. Besides, those "silly political shenanigans" bring in some major campaign money on both sides, and actually settling the issue would dry that up.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by ebuddy

I don't think it is IMHO. I'm not sure a great many even know the actual ROE V WADE conclusion Chuckit. It's clear from just about every poll I've seen that Americans while hesitant to call themselve Pro-Life do hold a Pro-Life position. The polls I've seen between those who strictly oppose abortion combined with those who oppose with the exception of rape, incest, and health of mother comprise an overwhelming majority generally opposed to abortion. Find any poll you wish. As it was in response to polling data, my point was entirely relevant.

What Chukcit is pointing out is that if you ask people if they are opposed to abortion many of them will say "Yes". But if you asked the same group of people if they think it should be legal many of them will say "Yes" as well.

Like Chuckit, I am opposed to abortion in most circumstances. I find it rather abhorrent. What I find more abhorrent is a government, be it at the state or Federal level, telling a woman what to do with her body. Hence, I am Pro-Choice. Not because I like abortion but because I dis-like abortion less than I dis-like government dictating what a woman can do to/with her body.

Having said that, this always should have been a state-level issue. And in my state I will fight the government if they try to outlaw all abortions. BUt if the majority of citizens in my state express their opinion that it should be outlawed and the state does so, I will respect the decision of my fellow citizens.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Dork.

That would be a good thing, however it would require 3/4 of states to approve it, which will never happen, because both sides generally refuse to compromise on the issue. Besides, those "silly political shenanigans" bring in some major campaign money on both sides, and actually settling the issue would dry that up.

You're probably right. You're definitely right if they tried it right now, because with Roe safe, only the activists care, which polarizes the politicians. But I think that if Roe were overturned, the political landscape on abortion would change dramatically. The activists who really vote on this issue, who are currently mostly pro-life, would all of a sudden cease to be as important, and the huge majorities that favor moderately pro-choice laws would overnight become the driving political force in the US.

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Like I've been saying for years - I'll live to see the day when abortion is a crime.

Hopefully you don't have a daughter who is raped. If you do, lets see you make her carry and give birth to her rapist's child.

----

If common sense prevailed. If justice were real. Abortion would be legal for the first trimester and illegal thereafter, including partial birth (with exceptions for the mother's life/health).

But the right equates the day after pill, which is just a high dose birth control pill, with partial birth abortion. This is nuts. These are two completely different things..there is no real comparison..outside of Bible talk.

[Spliffdaddy]

Stop being so dramatic.

Typical liberal...always brings up 'rape' as if that's the primary reason for abortion.

I'm willing to concede the 1.3% of abortions that are attributed (sometimes unrightfully so) to rape, incest, and danger to the mother's health.

Probably 80% of the general public would like to see abortion as birth control become illegal. It's *going* to happen. The will of the people will often go ignored, but not forever.

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Stop being so dramatic.

Typical liberal...always brings up 'rape' as if that's the primary reason for abortion.

I'm willing to concede the 1.3% of abortions that are attributed (sometimes unrightfully so) to rape, incest, and danger to the mother's health.

Probably 80% of the general public would like to see abortion as birth control become illegal. It's *going* to happen. The will of the people will often go ignored, but not forever.

Typical ignorant fundamentalist.

Q: Why is it that the S Dakota law does not provide exceptions for rape and mother's health. Why not incude that in the language?

A: Because this is religiously motivated legislation. Any human would admit that exceptions need to be made. A religious zombie (Muslim, Christian, whatever) would not see this.

I agree with you that killing a child is mad. A agree that partial birth abortion should be illegal. But any reasonable person would admit that a sack of cells the size of gnat is not a child. Religious fundamentalists cannot see this. Because they don't see...they are told what to see.

As always with religious extremists, both here and in the Middle East, everything is Black and White, everything is absolute, everything is extreme...nothing is human.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by chabig

It's easier than knowing you had a child--and killed it.

Some women have the
"If I don't want it, no one is going to get it either" mentality.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Moderator

Typical ignorant fundamentalist.

A: Because this is religiously motivated legislation. Any human would admit that exceptions need to be made. A religious zombie (Muslim, Christian, whatever) would not see this.

Wow what a hateful few paragraphs. Do you expect us to take you seriously when such bile gets spewed?

But any reasonable person would admit that a sack of cells the size of gnat is not a child. Religious fundamentalists cannot see this. Because they don't see...they are told what to see.

Again, more hateful nonsense. Just because you don't understand, don't bash or write off as nonsense. And it's not "What people are told" people come to these conclusions on their own.

As always with religious extremists, both here and in the Middle East, everything is Black and White, everything is absolute, everything is extreme...nothing is human.

That isn't what I have been hearing from the religious. But paint em with that wide brush anyhow.

[Spliffdaddy]

All I know is that legal abortion is about to become restricted.

It won't be my fault - but feel free to blame me if you want.

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Wow what a hateful few paragraphs. Do you expect us to take you seriously when such bile gets spewed?

How is that hateful? I can differentiate between a moral religious individual and a religious zombie. You can't It seems to me that those guys throwing Molatov cocktails at the Danish embassy over a cartoon are religious zombies. It seems to be that those guys trying to make outlaws of gay people who want to start families are zombies. And thos guys who want to force rape victims who get pregnat to have the child are..yes..religious zombies.

You forget that most of the left is religious as well. Anyone who is religious or spiritual is ok in my book. I can see the strength it can give a person, and the morality it can teach. But, as it always has through history, the fanatics take hold and feel the need to force it on everyone..usually under the pretext of some moral war. Look at Iran. Better yet, look at Iraq. They are going to have an elected fundamentalist regime in place for the next 50 years. Run by religious zombies who cannot seperate innate human morality from religion. And if this growing threat of domestic fundamentalism grows, so will we.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Moderator

How is that hateful? I can differentiate between a moral religious individual and a religious zombie.

It's hateful because anyone you don't agree with religiously you call a zombie.

You can't It seems to me that those guys throwing Molatov cocktails at the Danish embassy over a cartoon are religious zombies. It seems to be that those guys trying to make outlaws of gay people who want to start families are zombies. And thos guys who want to force rape victims who get pregnat to have the child are..yes..religious zombies.

1 of those three causes death. The other two do not. BTW I am ALL for gays starting families. If they can figure out how to pull that off that is

You forget that most of the left is religious as well. Anyone who is religious or spiritual is ok in my book. I can see the strength it can give a person, and the morality it can teach. But, as it always has through history, the fanatics take hold and feel the need to force it on everyone..usually under the pretext of some moral war. Look at Iran. Better yet, look at Iraq. They are going to have an elected fundamentalist regime in place for the next 50 years. Run by religious zombies who cannot seperate innate human morality from religion. And if this growing threat of domestic fundamentalism grows, so will we.

The problem is, too many people see ANYONE that takes their religion seriously as "zombies"

And that sir, is dishonest.

I think abortions are evil. I think they murder children. But if women want to take their OWN chances and get it done, I myself am not going to stop them. That is their free will.

But I ALSO wont complain if the gov puts and end to using abortions as a form of birth control. WHICH IS WHAT MOST CHRISTIANS ARE COMPLAINING about. Which make up MOST of the abortions happening today.

You would see very little people complaining if abortions were legal for certain reasons. "Forgot to use a condom" shouldn't be one.

[Goldfinger]

The USA's lawmakers anno 2006:

[Moderator]

I'm not going to argue abortion. I'd never want to be a part of any abortion. I wouldn't support my girlfriend or future wife having an abortion. On the other hand the notion of the government controlling a person's body rubs me the wrong way. I think personal privacy out to be a right.

So there is a dilemma. The best solution I see is to legalize abortion before the fetus is a living, feeling, being..that is before it has a central nervous system and a brain. And to make it illegal after. Killing a baby is FCUKED up. Taking a day after pill to dislodge a wad of semen and egg is not. I still wouldn't do it myself. But I'm not arrogant and selfish enough to believe that people can't make their own determinations.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Moderator

I'm not going to argue abortion. I'd never want to be a part of any abortion. I wouldn't support my girlfriend or future wife having an abortion. On the other hand the notion of the government controlling a person's body rubs me the wrong way. I think personal privacy out to be a right.

I agree. It's a good thing certain people are trying to protect ANOTHER body, and not just the woman's.

The woman had a chance to protect her body before and during sex.

Again having said that, I wouldn't make an attempt to STOP abortion from becoming legal. People can hang themselves.

I am not worried about the babies they kill. They are in a better place. It's the women that needs cared for, and be concerned for.

So there is a dilemma. The best solution I see is to legalize abortion before the fetus is a living, feeling, being..that is before it has a central nervous system and a brain.

No one knows when life starts, and to think any one of us can say for sure, is very arrogant.

To deny it kills a living, growing life is a falsehood.

And to make it illegal after. Killing a baby is FCUKED up. Taking a day after pill to dislodge a wad of semen and egg is not.

How would you like being called a wad of semen and egg? Because that is basically what you are too.

I still wouldn't do it myself. But I'm not arrogant and selfish enough to believe that people can't make their own determinations.

I don't think wanting to save the life of those who cannot defend themselves as being selfish or arrogant. But ok.

I do see people aborting babies out of convenience as being so however. And that is the main reasons abortions are being performed today.

And that fact makes me kind of embarrassed to be a human.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Stop being so dramatic.

Typical liberal...always brings up 'rape' as if that's the primary reason for abortion.

Quit bringing up the average case as a way to marginalize others.

Spliff: "I'm going to create a device that will kill everybody whose hair isn't brown, black or blonde!"

Larry Liberal: "What about redheads? I don't think we should kill them."

Spliff: "Typical liberal, always bringing up 'red hair' as if that's the main hair color in the world."

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by Kevin

No one knows when life starts, and to think any one of us can say for sure, is very arrogant.

To deny it kills a living, growing life is a falsehood.

How would you like being called a wad of semen and egg? Because that is basically what you are too.

We can come certainly come to a scientific determination of when the fetus can feel and/or think..based on the existance of a central nervous system and brain. Yes. we can. And though this would not be perfect. It would be as close as we're capable of coming..it would prevent a lot of abortions, it would save a lot of lives, and it would restore the right that a person has to personal privacy.

If you get it outlawed. Its just gonna go the other way in 20 years once a a fe liberal judges get on the court. Don't be so shortsighted. A smart comrpomise backed by scientific evidence is the best we can do on this issue.

-----
Ugh. I never said it wasn't a living, growing life. Please stop with misquotes its tiresome.

I said a living, feeling, being.

ps I have a plant that is a living growing life so what
-----

I am not a wad of semen and egg. But I was before I was me.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Kevin

How would you like being called a wad of semen and egg?

Mmmm, sounds like breakfast. I'll take mine scrambled, please.

You know, it seems to me that people aren't as far apart on abortion as it seems sometimes, and that's why I think a national consensus could be reached. I hear a lot of pro-life people say that they don't think abortion should be absolutely outlawed, and a lot of pro-choice people say that they don't like abortions. I bet that with an emphasis on education and easy access to contraception and next-day pills, abortion could be reduced even further (it's been decreasing significantly for over a decade already). No one wants to have an abortion. Reduce the number of abortions through means other than outlawing it. It's probably more effective anyway, as abortions are probably going to be available whether they're legal or not. They'll just be more expensive and less regulated.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Goldfinger

The USA's lawmakers anno 2006:

It's my impression that laws against abortion are a new thing, not an ancient thing. I bet those medieval monks or lawyers or whoever they are didn't give a damn about abortions.

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by BRussell

Mmmm, sounds like breakfast. I'll take mine scrambled, please.

You know, it seems to me that people aren't as far apart on abortion as it seems sometimes, and that's why I think a national consensus could be reached. I hear a lot of pro-life people say that they don't think abortion should be absolutely outlawed, and a lot of pro-choice people say that they don't like abortions. I bet that with an emphasis on education and easy access to contraception and next-day pills, abortion could be reduced even further ...

I agree. I see the religious right as a barrier though. If you use religion entirely as your basis for the question then life begins at conception and anything else is murder. This is a problem. There's an ideology there that prevents sensible compromise. And because the right is so passionate about this..the left is reluctant to budge for fear that giving them an inch will simple be the first step in giving away the whole mile. Which is justified because the right wants the mile.

Because the adminsitration would not exist without the religious right, they are beholden to it and unlikely to make a true, good faith compromise even if it could reduce abortions to near zero.

An over the counter day after pill could prevent thousands and thousands of abortions, including later term abortions that even I oppose. But to them its not the abortions its the principle....even if that principle mysteriously vanishes when it comes to death penalty or a hundred other issues.

Its the same with terrorism. We could take a hard look at some of our policies as a nation toward the middle east and make huge inroads in reducing terrorism by reducing the desperation that causes terrorism...but the right would prefer to think we can somehow kill them all.

Its this absolutism that religion, when taken without a healthy dose of critical, personal thought, inevitably causes. And by religion I mean established religious doctrine and ideology, not personal spirituality.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Moderator

We can come certainly come to a scientific determination of when the fetus can feel and/or think..based on the existance of a central nervous system and brain. Yes. we can.

No, we came come up with an idea of what a unborn baby feels or thinks or realizes at the time. And there is more to it than just a "glob full of cells"

And though this would not be perfect. It would be as close as we're capable of coming..

And my point is, until we know for sure, we shouldn't be doing it.

If you get it outlawed. Its just gonna go the other way in 20 years once a a fe liberal judges get on the court. Don't be so shortsighted. A smart comrpomise backed by scientific evidence is the best we can do on this issue.

Again, I never said I was trying to STOP it

Ugh. I never said it wasn't a living, growing life. Please stop with misquotes its tiresome.

I said a living, feeling, being.

I wasn't talking about you specifically. And you don't know what a unborn baby "feels" And by that I am just not talking about pain.

I am not a wad of semen and egg. But I was before I was me.

Once the egg becomes fertilized it's no longer just semen and egg.

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by Kevin

No, we came come up with an idea of what a unborn baby feels or thinks or realizes at the time. And there is more to it than just a "glob full of cells"

Once the egg becomes fertilized it's no longer just semen and egg.

ok. so are you telling me that, say an hour after an egg becomes fertilized. There is a living, feeling, thinking baby in the womans womb?

I would like to be on record as saying. Umm. No. Not the case. But if Pat Robertson says it it must be true.

[subego]

I want to throw out a few questions:

1) For people who believe abortion should be illegal, what's with the rape clause? Seems to me one is compounding one immoral act with another.

2) For those who object to people using abortions as "birth-control" might it not be more damaging to force such a miscreant into a role of societal responsibility, i.e becoming a parent? Admittedly, this is me at my most cynical.

3) Doesn't making this a state by state issue effectively penalize only poor people?

4) This is one of my favorite thought experiments. When the lab-technician carrying a crate of test-tube babies slips on a banana-peel and drops them all, is that involuntary manslaughter?

[Spliffdaddy]

My feeling is that there should be no exceptions to abortion being illegal. I was merely offering a compromise when I stated that rape-induced pregnancy should be excluded. Otherwise, there should be legislation prohibiting the rapist from having any parental rights. Also, an exception should be made when the mother's life would be placed in jeopardy by giving birth. Possibly.