Just to hark back to what I said before:

It's pretty clear that the pro-life people in this thread (including the very reasonable position held by Grey Acumen above) couch their position under the assumption that a fetus is a child. If we acknowledge this as true, then abortion is by definition murder, because a "child" is a person and you cannot take the life of another person legally (even if they wish it, which is, yet again, another giant can of worms).

Many of the pro-choice people in this thread, including me, do not acknowledge that 3 month old fetuses are children. They are living beings, for sure, but so are cattle and so are pigs, and both of those animals have more cognition than a 3 month old fetus does.

I'm pointing this out again because it is the entire crux of the argument: informed pro-choice individuals do not believe that a 1/2/3/4/5 month old fetus is a human being, and thus they are not privy to the rights that being human entails.

Are there enough people willing to adopt all the unwanted babies? In 2005 there were 1.2 million abortions in the US. If abortion was banned could the government agencies finds loving homes for 1 million+ children every single year? I would imagine that after giving birth a number of women would prefer to keep the child. I'm a guy with no kids so cannot begin to imagine the complex emotional bonds involved between a mother and her child.

@Bodhesatva heart beat begins 22 days after conception! most abortions are done after this. without intervention the 'fetus' has a good shot at being born. even if the woman miscariages i would say it is still a baby and in heaven with God.
Don't forget that many pro choice people are ok with partial birth abortions (president clinton vetoed the ban.) i think you all know what brutal murder this 'procdure' is

your original premise of why the disconnect is correct however, pro choice people mistakenly think that a 5 month old baby is just tissue even though there have been many cases of babies born that early surving

took this from a pro life website, thought the part concerning brain waves was particularly relevant

When a woman is pregnant, science tells us that the new life she carries is a complete and fully new human being from the moment of fertilization. By the time most abortions can be performed, the baby already has a beating heart and identifiable brain waves. The baby living in her mother is as distinct and unique a new person/human being as you are from me, and as deserving of protection under the law as we are.

The baby every mother carries as she faces a life and death decision has a beating heart at 18 days after fertilization and brain waves as early as six weeks after fertilization. Most abortions are not performed until nine weeks of the pregnancy. Even RU 486 chemical abortions can't be done until after six weeks.

ok sorry for being a forum hog but i should mention the founder of planned parenthood was a rabid racist. abortion disporportionately kills more black and latino babies. this was a part of margaret sanger original plan.

You're probably correct that most everyone that's commented in this thread does have this underlying assumption either right up front or buried somewhere in it. My line of reasoning involves the hosting mechanism setup and what the reasonable rights are of the server.

Compromise on murder?  That's worse then the people who don't see it as murder in my book.  There are some things you can't compromise on.  IF i had a stance where i compromised on murder i wouldn't be able to look myself in the mirror.

You want to stop abortions as casual birthcontrol?  Distribute other birth control and teach people.

That's basically my position on it.

All making abortions Illegal would do would either make you a big hypocrite or prevent all abortions even in the case of rape and murder.  You can't have it both ways otherwise it's conditional human status.  Which is bullshit.

A fetus is a human or it isn't.

You can't kill one person just to save another, abortions when the mothers life is in danger wouldn't be aloud. (and wouldn't in Roe V Wade.)  Otherwise plenty of doctors could be sued for performing said abortions and everytime they did they would be breaking the Hypocratic Oath.

Nor could you definitly get an abortion because of rape.  Though imagine how psychologically crushing it would be to have a baby growing inside of you that's half the evil man that violently attacked and forced himself on you.  For 9 months.  Every day a giant reminder as if you couldn't forget already.

There is a reason why when people do try to have rape babies to "get something positve" out of it i've never seen or heard of it work well.

For prostituion. (Though i'd never use it.)

For Flag burning (though i'd never doi t.)

Advanced questioning Methods? (Like the SATs?)  Ha no really, against torture.  It just isn't reliable.

For the Death Penalty

For Assisted Suicide registered with the state after a clean bill of mental health is obtained.

Against Gun Control, aside from like... Machine Guns, RPGs, Tanks... you know the big stuff.

For the legalizatin of drugs. (It's a war you can't win and costs us billions.)

For stronger boarder control against illegal immagrants.

Against any state or federal funding to do anything for an illegal immigrant.

For gay marriage. (I don't see why people care.) 

For basic universal healthcare.

Against Abortion but see it as a nessesity. (Besides i'm not sure i'd trust the genetics of most people who need to get abortions. (Anyone every see Idocracy.

there is no question, a baby is a parasite. therefore a mother has the right to defend against parasites. at a certain point a baby can survive outside of its mother (still needs support, but no longer from the mother).

i understand that people feel its murder to kill a fetus, but telling someone they can't do something against a parasite is tyranny. let them chose. i am not pro life or pro choice, but pro not my right to impose my beliefs on others. it is a very tough decision and imposing my belief makes both ways worse.

is it me or is it a coincidence that more of the prominent pro life people rnt women, who dont have to decide between a baby and their future?