You also have to Laugh Out Loud when someone writes that:

"Heaven is filled with boys and girls,who though unwanted by their earthly parents, have been welcomed by a Father who is committed to their eternal joy and good."

Kirby 483,

I didn't forget. The reasons I listed were the only instances I could countenance abortion. The 14 year old you mention, people unable to raise a child for whatever reason - there are many people who would adopt unwanted children. Think about what it must feel like for a woman longing for a child that she cannot have, when she knows that children are being aborted willy nilly by the thousands for no good reason. And please don't describe religious people as 'nutters'. They have as much right to an opinion as you do. My own opinion on the matter of abortion has nothing to do with religion anyway.

The bottom line is that no one has the right to use someone else’s body for their survival. That’s the difference between abortion and killing a child. Whether abortion is “normal” or celebrated by some is irrelevant. This debate is actually a really simple one:

Anti-abortionist: “Killing the unborn is no different to killing a child.”

Pro-choicer: “No one has the right to use someone else’s body for their survival. You wouldn’t force a mother to donate a kidney to their child.”

Anti-abortionist: “Well the woman should have thought of that before she fell pregnant. The unborn child didn’t choose to be conceived.”

Pro-choicer: “Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.”

And that’s where the discussion ends. Next...

By the way, the Abrahamic god is the biggest abortionist in all fiction (and non-fiction), so appealing to their religion will do the followers of the Abrahamic religions no good in this debate.

In am pro retrospective abortion in some cases.

If a woman has 'full control over her body' and the man has no say on the decision whether or not to abort or keep a child - then a question must be asked about fairness if the situation is reversed, and whether the man should be responsible for the upbringing of the child if the woman chooses to keep that child against the mans wishes.

If the woman can kill that unborn child and the man has no say in it, then if the man does not want the child and the woman does, he should not be liable.

yep the regressives dumbed people down enough in the 1970's and 80's to think abortion was all about the poor 14 year old who was raped. Of course those who pointed out it would lead to open killing season on babies were demonised and hounded. Now that they were proven 100% right the feminist don't want to talk about it. Not enough children for adoption because our doctors slaughter them. The dumb and callous country. Thats what happens when the ' compassionate' refressives take power. They are filled with tears for sorry days and white ribbon days and are heartless towards the unborn.