Someone like me who is often subjected to invective like that above from people who like rhetoric more than a genuine discussion. I've racked my mind for a simple solution to the abortion question, and there isn't any. On the one hand, I do empathize with the desire to have control over one's body. However, I also have this religious belief that life is sacred, and my ethical concerns regarding the practice of abortion. In the end, I decided that I am, in fact, pro-life in most situations. That is to say, I don't believe someone should be able to get an abortion on demand. Valid reasons for abortion include: rape, incest, and an immediate threat posed by the pregnancy to the health of the mother (ectopic pregnancy, for example). Valid reasons for abortion do not include: "I don't particularly want a baby right now", and "it was an accident." I hate to say it, but you knew the risks. You decided it was an acceptable risk to have sex, and you got burned. That doesn't give you the right to take it out on your unborn child.

A friend of mine who's pro-choice but who would never have an abortion personally (she's an ethical vegetarian from a Hindu background and believes deeply in the sanctity of life, even while simultaneously believing it's not her place to impose those beliefs on others) pointed out to me that there's something inherently hypocritical in allowing abortion only in cases of rape or incest. After all, it seems that two major reasons to be opposed to abortion are:

• it's not the fetus's fault it was conceived, and
• the fetus has a right to life?

In cases of rape or incest, both still hold, so why should the circumstances of the child's conception affect its rights (whatever you believe those to be)?

Just a question I found thought-provoking, and I sincerely apologize if there's already a node about this.