Again I would ask you, MIB, how much medical training have you had? Do you believe you are able to make absolute judgements about every single possible health consequence that a woman might face in a particular pregnancy? Do you believe you can craft an abortion ban that would only allow those abortions you find morally correct? I hold that it cannot be done.

Certainly I share your fear about abortion being used for mere convenience purposes, whether it is for sex selection, because the fetus may be gay, or because the woman simply doesn't feel it is the best time. I do not believe that abortion should be used as birth control.

But the cases I am talking about do not fit that classification, they are real health concerns that real women have. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of women out there who face high-risk pregnancies, almost all of whom desperately want their babies. But I don't believe we should force them to undergo the suffering that could be caused by the pregnancy (including things like loss of organs) simply because they won't die. And I know that we cannot say for certain which women face life-threatening complications and which do not.

We can and must remove the need for abortion, and that means birth control. But the anti-abortion forces in this country are hopelessly entangled with the religious fanatics (note, I am not including you as a religious fanatic) some of whom believe that women are their husband's property and almost all of whom reject the use of contraception.

We must also deal with the pro-abortion forces who simply don't want to acknowledge the reality of the procedure and what it does. But the system we have now, with each side screaming at each other does not work. The "partial-birth" abortion ban does nothing to stop abortions. It is political gesturing, and nothing more.

At the present time, that is correct. At least you're consistent about saying it's presently her right to kill a baby because the baby is gay.

Mr. Apple, meet Mr. Orange. Your examples above are really out in left field. Get real for a minute, will ya? When was the last time a women conceived and gave birth to a fish, huh? A human being can ONLY reproduce a human being. Period.

"Murder" is a purely legal term and cannot apply in your argument. Plus, what you said makes no sense, but that's no surprise.

It has been done before, it can be done again. I am not the expert in crafting certain laws, so I would leave that up to those who can, hoping they can carefully do so.

At least you're not among the rabid pro-death crowd who does believe this.

posted by MIB:
It was under those same past laws (1971 to be exact) that my mother was forced to hemorrhage for 18 hours because she was not "close enough to death" to qualify for the narrow state exception to the abortion ban. That is the reason she became pro-choice, and the reason that I still am.