There is too much of a gray area on this subject, which rabid pro lifers refuse to aknowledge.

But over all I am pro choice. I DO NOT believe that human life begins at conception, and the fact that the bible is the only reason the vast majority of pro-lifers feel the way they do illustrates how little our society thinks for themselves.

A multiple level translation of something written thousands of years ago, with various versions floating around, chock full of innacuracies and contradictions is hardly something an individual should base their entire decision making around.

A true moral compas comes from inside each person, not from a book, and having the fear of eternal punishment be the only deterent from doing wrong shows how truely immoral these people are.

Maybe it got aborted!

I agree with you, and I try to take a pragmatic approach to it. Abortion has existed forever, and it will keep on existing no matter what laws there are.

Sex education and contraception are a lot better since abortions are not 100% safe, and it helps - whatever the fundamentalists say - the number of teenage moms are a lot lower in countries with sex education and free condoms.

@game boy

your post modernist perspective would bring about anarchy. you say there are "no moral absolutes" SO it what case is it ok to molest children game boy??????? when arguing the post modernist bull crap you have to take it all the way if there are no moral absolutes then it would be ok for someone who didn't like you to shoot you because, for them, it was ok. please respond to the direct question

Clearly you don't live in NI with the F&^*ing Free P's in power!!!! 

that does not have anything to do with it being right or wrong, just because people accept a culture of death doesn't make it moral

How do you make absolute morals absolute? Can you do it without a metaphysical attachment? I think it is possible but for that it takes other myths like science. They never get objective though, but you can have hegemonic intersubjective morals that work as absolute in their own context.

Sorry, I have to change the last sentence to ... but you WILL have hegemonic intersubjective morals that work as absolute in their own context.

 If there are moral absolutes how do you intellectually go about finding them? It's not a trick question.

If the child is viable, I'm prolife. It takes two to tango, and there are plenty of contraceptives, day after pills, ABSTINENCE, it may not be ENTIRELY her responsibility, but damnit, when it's viable, it IS a life, you kill it, it's murder.

A mother can be convicted of murder for killing her BORN children, and anyone who murders a pregnant woman gets double murder, or if that person injures a woman to the point that she has a miscarriage, it's counted as murder. Just cause the baby is still inside her doesn't change anything about the matter.

If it's viable, it's ALIVE. Up to a point, it may be reasonable, though distasteful, but after that point, It's wrong. Period.

I am willing to accept it when the pregnant woman is actually in danger of her LIFE from trying to carry the child, that's reasonable. But it is not acceptable when it's just that she's going to be inconvenienced by it. IF YOU CAN'T TAKE RESPONSIBILITY, DON'T HAVE SEX!!!

And yes,I realize that the point at which a fetusis viable is a very vague peroid, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist at all.

you are absolutely right, and that is my very point.  without absolute moral right and wrong we will have chaos and anarchy.  man cannot supply this for these very problems.  If the right and wrong don't come from a higher being then how do any of us establish what is right and what is wrong 

question for those who are athiest/agnostic  how do YOU answer my original question?  how do you keep people from doing what 'seems' right to them when it affects others for whom that action does not 'seem' right?