That would be similar to accusing them of hypocrisy for opposing murder. They view abortion as murder and, therefore, the government has the duty to protect others (fetus) from harm. 

Abortion is a contentious issue because those who oppose abortion classify it as malum in se. Those who support it view it as a constitutional right. It makes compromise, which is what I advocate, an impossible goal.

Nowhere in the Const. does it mention abortion b/c if a woman was to get pregnant, she would be married first with consent of the father I might add.  Also, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness rings a bell and unless you define abortion as fulfillment of happiness then there is a defining creed for life laid out by our founding fathers.

There is no compromise.  There is rational belief that our nation, founded on Judeo-Christian values, should be a shining city upon a hill not tarnished by the repercussions of immorality and lack of maturity of men and women.

It's actually funny you should mention that...

I've always wondered how, if the fetus is property of the woman, why exactly does the man have zero say in what happens to that fetus?

Afterall, in a child support case, the man is always told, "You played, you pay".  In other words, you slept with her and made this kid, it's 50/50, so do your part. 

But if a woman wants to abort the baby and the man wants to keep it... the law says, "it's not yours to decide what happens to it".

Seems a little hypocritical to me.   She wants to keep the kid, and you don't, tough crap, open your wallet and pay up.  But if a man wants to keep the kid, and the woman doesn't, tough crap, the kid is getting terminated.

halogamer1989 said:Nowhere in the Const. does it mention abortion b/c if a woman was to get pregnant, she would be married first with consent of the father I might add.  Also, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness rings a bell and unless you define abortion as fulfillment of happiness then there is a defining creed for life laid out by our founding fathers. 

There is no compromise.  There is rational belief that our nation, founded on Judeo-Christian values, should be a shining city upon a hill not tarnished by the repercussions of immorality and lack of maturity of men and women.

I've always wondered how, if the fetus is property of the woman, why exactly does the man have zero say in what happens to that fetus?

Afterall, in a child support case, the man is always told, "You played, you pay".  In other words, you slept with her and made this kid, it's 50/50, so do your part. 

But if a woman wants to abort the baby and the man wants to keep it... the law says, "it's not yours to decide what happens to it".

Seems a little hypocritical to me.   She wants to keep the kid, and you don't, tough crap, open your wallet and pay up.  But if a man wants to keep the kid, and the woman doesn't, tough crap, the kid is getting terminated.