The Pro-Life position (as it relates to abortion) can be given by syllogism. As much as I dislike Aristotle in general, in this case, the position is logically fairly simple:

  • A fetus is a human being.
  • A human being is entitled to legal protection.
  • A fetus is entitled to legal protection.

That is theoretically the basis of the pro-life movement. I personally believe that there is a good deal of other motivations involved with many pro-lifers, many involving people's probably undue concern about other people's sexual mores. Be that as it may, and altough it may be that when couples are in a situation of unwanted pregnancy syllogisms don't count for much; still, the basic form of this argument has to be acknowledged without having to be a facist theocrat.

It could be argued that the first term of the argument is up for debate, and is a matter of personal interpretation. But even though pregnancy is a very personal situation, the way that it is so special that people are allowed to interpret other people's personhood in a way that is not otherwise allowed in legal or moral situations has to be clearly explained if the syllogism is to be argued against.