Col Rogue, you continue to be in denial. I don't give a rats what this Bill Muehlenberg says, an unborn child is a CAPTIVE, not a "guest", as a "guest" has a CHOICE NOT to be there.

"When you know the circumstances which prevailed to result in her being pregnant, presumably against her will" - Col...

One can assume the circumstances very easily, Col. The woman CONSENTED to sexual intercourse - therefore she INVITES the outcome of that risk. As I wrote before, if you take a risk in life you invite the consequences of that risk.

Claiming a right to abortion-on-demand is like the gambler who goes to the casino, gambles a lot of money, and when she loses it all, demands it all back from the casino operator. "But I didn't WANT to lose all that money..." Sorry sweetheart, you took the risk!

I am not demanding abstinence BTW, I am simply demanding people accept RESPONSIBILITY for their own actions and choices, instead of making themselves out to be the victim.

"you are trying to define a womans “liability” to herself" - Col...

No, I'm not. I'm defining her liability to the unborn child inside her womb - why are you still not getting it, Col? An unborn child is certainly a biologically seperate individual - whether it requires a womb to develop is a mute point as non-viability isn't a just reason to abort.

BTW Col, do you agree with late term abortions?

It is a principle of justice that a wrong-doer is someone who INITIATES AGGRESSION against another. A murderer, a rapist, an assaulter, a kidnapper, a thief are all such cases. They are all wrong-doers because they have initiated force against an innocent victim and violated the fundamental rights a person has to be free from aggression. All human beings have an unalienable right to be free from the aggression of others but equally, we have an obligation not to aggress against others. We have a right to defend ourselves, should another attempt to aggress against us, as we also have a right to punish those who initiate aggression against another. This is RETALIATORY AGGRESSION as opposed to initiated aggression. There is an important difference. So it is justifiable to defend oneself against the aggression of another and it is justifiable for a society to punish criminals and wrong-doers. These are basic principles of justice.

The womb is a very vulnerable place, a child can quite easily die there through purely natural causes. Parents have a natural RESPONSIBILITY to protect their children from harm and to provide for them. If you endanger the life of someone else, without their consent, then you have a moral OBLIGATION to protect such a life from harm. Too often people focus only on rights, but in truth RIGHTS COME WITH RESPONSIBILITIES AND FREEDOM COMES WITH OBLIGATIONS. The two go hand in hand. Rights and responsibilities are flip sides of the same coin.

There is no doubt who is initiating aggression in the case of abortion. It is the woman and the abortion performer. The child is a completely innocent victim of their initiated aggression. They are violating the non aggression principle which is the basis of justice.