OK, I guess I'll just end my time in this thread.

Do you think a pregnancy that was the result of rape or incest, or one where the mother's life is in danger should have the _option_ to be terminated?

I never claimed that it was sexist (you can read my other replies), just that your info was inaccurate. Statistically, a deviation of 18.5% in the ratios between men and women (1.55 vs 1.30) is not insignificant. Also, some women being in support of abortion does not exclude it from being sexist. Women's suffrage did not see wide support from either sex before the 20th Century, in the US.

Strawman argument don't you think, there's always exception but youre talking about such a small numbers it's not even worth discussing. Yes rape or if the mothers health is at risk it should be allowed but lets not pretend that's why the majority of abortions are used.

I never claimed you thought it was. It is insignificant by the article you linked it's a 4% difference between the genders, not sure how you would ever claim that was a wide margin.  It most certainly does excluded it from being sexist, unless you want to argue that women are too dumb/weak to decide for them self and are controlled by the male vote.

4% out of hundred in pure difference is a misleading number, a better representation, here, to determine the impact of sex, is a percentile of the mean (correct calculation: 100*(42-38)/((38+42)/2) = 10%)

I do think that people, in general, largely create their opinions by osmosis from society, and not through their own logical reasoning (in the case that there is no obvious answer.) That's why we also have 78% of Swedes supporting abortion in all cases and 65% of Brazilians with the belief should be illegal (with the reasonable exceptions.) Not because either the Swedes or Brazilians are retarded, not because they are looking at a fundamentally different moral question, not because logic works differently in some parts of the world. But rather, because they grew up in an environment that encouraged their respective beliefs. At heart, no one truly has a fully independent opinion on anything.

Not a strawman argument at all. Pregnancies as the result of rape and incest happen.  If you're going to take the moral high ground that abortion is murder, then it's _always_ murder. You don't get to pick and choose which specific "exceptions" make it not murder, or dismiss the entire topic as "not worth discussing".  I'm sorry that your rigid moral stance on abortion gets uncomfortable when put in the context of a 12 year old who is gang raped and gets pregnant and is forced, by law, to see that pregnancy to term. I'm sure all the self-righteous pro-lifers will line up to adopt all the rape babies so it's no big deal, right?

I do get to pick and choose, cause you know a little secret its my fucking opinion you don't get to dictate how come to my own beliefs. Also rigid? The whole point of your rant stems from my opinion not being rigid you silly baby killing enthusiast.

I Would explain how I come to that conclusion if you were actually willing to lesson but it's clear youre not.

Not me my friend, 

Also a decision that's looking more and more likely to get reversed. 

This is what happens when a rabid right wing press is able to suppress facts and frame opinion as being as important as the truth. 

Too many people these days cry that their opinions are as good as other peoples facts. They aren't. Our right wing gutter press has successfully brainwashed two entire generations, luckily we are slipping away from the grasp of that slimy cretin Murdoch.

He doesn't like it one bit mind, his papers have been running articles about how "social networks are tearing apart society" 

Exactly. 

So, you're pro-choice then?