Maybe they should make the women watch through an ultrasound while it's happening. I bet abortion rates would sharply decline.

I personally believe that abortion is murder, I had to write a 20 page research paper for my Crimes against humanities class this past semester on basically this same topic.

My conclusion is that while my personal belief is that it is a type of murder, more like manslaughter or infantcide, it is really not practical to outlaw abortion outright. A more practical solution, and one that would not help alleviate any issues of either side, Pro-life or Pro-Choice, but if we reduced the time in which abortions can take place, to 10-12 weeks, approximately when brain development begins, would be a good compromise between the two sides.

Roe v. Wade set up viability as the limit, which is now about 24 weeks. But 22 weeks has been the soonest a child can survive on premature birth. Medical technology is always increasing, so the window of abortion should be reduced in the US.

21 weeks.

Ouch. War never is just between soldiers and soldiers. I would wonder if you could name one conflict in the last 100 years without "helpless" civilians/ children dead. Would be a interesting find

Did you think I was unaware of the realities of war? Was one step ahead of you on this one, see the highlighted word in red . 

I think you will find that it is illegal to intentionally kill civilians in war  and it's actually viewed quite unfavorably by people of all political idealogies....which sort of makes the point. Please note that he is having a discussion about the views of those who view abortion as murder and that this is precisely how they see it (ie intentional murder of helpless, defenseless, and threat unaware infants.  I only fully agree with them when it comes to abortions after the 21st week.  So to a certain degree I am playing devil's advocate here because I don't think their view is inconsistent at all....even if I don't fully agree with them.

I recognize, that you love debates and play the devil's advocat sometimes. Not a bad thing at all. I saw the intentional, but decided, that I won't count it in for this case. Imo it sounds to much like hipocracy, if you compare soldiers with abortion-doctors.

I follow highwaystar101 here. It's a job that has to be done, otherwise desperate women would go back to needles and stuff like that, which would let to severe injuries or their death. I would prefer if there where no abortions at all, but the world is not perfect and never will be.

Well there are a few different things here and we shouldn't confuse them.

I agree we don't want to force this underground but I have yet to actually see numbers on how many women would actually go to the back alley abortion and I think it is important to have those numbers to make an argument because you can't make policy based on the extreme minority (note I'm not arguing that the numbers are large or small, just stating that we need to know to discuss this point effectively).

My reasoning behind abortion is that a sperm and/or egg individually are not human but down the road when they become a viable fetus they are, according to medical and legal experts, a human.  Humans have rights and so while a woman can choose to effect her body even when it impacts a non-human organism that right can become legitimately obstructed when she has to destroy a human life to exercise that right.  So the question is when does it become human.  That line of reasoning is to me the justification for allowing abortions not the back alley abortion deal..although it is certainly worthy of reviewing and discussing.

But the main point highwaystar was making here has to do with comparing the job of a soldier to that of an abortion doctor as viewed by pro-life advocates and specifically that they should be viewed the same way.  I don't want to repeat a bunch of what I've already said so I'll just say that I've made a good case for why they are completely different and while both have jobs that have moral and ethical questions they are not the same questions and the answers to those questions from a given individual aren't necessarily required to be the same for logical consistency because they are so different.

PS - I did want to add that this doctor was specifically famous/infamous (depending on your view) for performing late term abortions and iirc also partial birth abortions.  There are allegations that he did so even when there was no medical justification.  Regardless of if those allegations are true or not people will and did form opinions based on that.  For a bit of perspective, as I understand it, he was one of 3 doctors in the country willing to do what he did.  I think that speaks quite loudly in its own right that out of our massive medical field only 3 are willing to perform these procedures. To be clear none of this even remotely justifies his murder, far far from it in fact.  But it does add some perspective on why many who view abortion as murder loathed him so much.

QFT! I agree with this man.

While no murder is to be commended, this is quite ironic that the murderer of 60,000+ viable human beings for profit is gunned down in a house of God (thou shalt not kill). This guy aborted late-term fetuses because the mother could not go to the club all the time.

I agree death of a soldier and a baby are two different animals. Soldier you typically havea producing member of society and a baby is useless but damn cute. They only become useful when they are adults.