You know, you really should engage with the issues more KMB.

There has been some criticism in the past that the religious community in Pensacola, Florida is so backwardly conservative and fundamentalist that the entire town must face some complicity in creating an environment which could only inevitably lead to the creation of four teenagers who would express their belief in the concept of love thy neighbour by choosing Jesus's birthday as the one perfect day of the year on which to blow up an abortion clinic.

Critics point to the fact that in Pensacola, there have been two separate occasions when avowedly Christian men killed two doctors who were performing abortions.

Sandi Magathan Droubay who wrote an article on war-monger and biblical literalist, Bush, lives in Pensacola with her family. She advised: “Since I’ve lived here we’ve had one school board member jailed, four out of five county commissioners brought up on criminal charges, several abortion clinic bombings, two abortion doctors killed, and 51 stellar members of the community arrested in a huge cocaine bust. The beaches, however, are beautiful.”

Ms. Magathan has an M.A. in Religious studies.

KMB, you condemn abortion outright however, the contention of Christians that life begins upon conception is at variance with your Bible. Genesis 2:7 clearly informs us that human life begins when the baby takes its first breath of air: "God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Therefore, I'd say life must begin with one's first breath.

And Pope Gregory XIV (1535-1591)declared that abortion within eighty days of conception was permitted.

Jewely, feel free to borrow my hard hat and Hazmat suit girl. I’m off to take refuge in a disused bomb shelter.

No, KMB, it's not gobbledygook - here was your earlier comment:

"Can it be definitively established that the foetus is not human?
If not, then surely the law should err in favour of the foetus."

This is entirely subjective. Every single reference point for people can be twisted to encompass other entities or even exclude people.

"Can it breathe" dogs can too. "Is it capable of language?" The comatose aren't. "Does it have five fingers?" Monkeys do. "Does its heart tick?" Hell, a watch can do that.

And so on.

Go on, KMB. Throw any definition at me. I'm sure I can effectively play games, just as you have done when people have made points about being capable of thought, breathing and so on.

So, unless we're willing to stretch the boundaries of being human to monkeys, dogs, watches and god knows what else, you need to accept that this comment here is a semantic nightmare. The fact is, we do need to make decisions based on society versus the individual, taking into account humanity as well.

The ultimate result of banning abortions is proven to be bad for society as a whole. This is one factor. The other factor is humanity, and your definition that a foetus is a human is disputed, and being unable to "definitively establish" that a foetus isn't a human is poppycock, because otherwise, we can't "definitively establish" that a chimp isn't, either.

I see Jewely has descended into raving..… debating the merit of the abuse she hurls upon herself… all mouth and no substance…

Ah and words from ole’ vacuous, the resident Moron…… hey rover… go fetch a stick…

And the slave fetus analogy fails on the grounds….

A slave is a separate and independent entity to a woman. A fetus is entirely dependent and shares the same nutrition and oxygen source as that of the woman in whose body it is developing. Thus a fetus, which, puts the womans body at risk, has no defensibly comparative status to that of a slave.

Only one person should hold decisions over the processes of an individuals body and that should be the person who occupies it. A fetus is a temporary occupant of a womans body and must, therefore expect to have only subordinate rights to those of the woman, else we relegate the woman to being merely a life support system for her uterus and what grows within it.

A woman’s body and her sovereign choice… everyone else is a merely bystander or has only subordinate rights.

"Only one person should hold decisions over the processes of an individuals body and that should be the person who occupies it. A fetus is a temporary occupant of a womans body and must, therefore expect to have only subordinate rights to those of the woman, else we relegate the woman to being merely a life support system for her uterus and what grows within it.

A woman’s body and her sovereign choice… everyone else is a merely bystander or has only subordinate rights."

Col that was brilliant and I thank you. This is what I couldn't explain properly about how I felt.

Jewely you said “I truly don’t think abortions should have anything to do with men.”

I’m going to disagree. This would preclude me as a male from wishing to see a reduction in the number of abortions in our community which I do.

The moment of conception is of value. I agree a foetus is not a child but the moment a pregnancy is confirmed can be a beautiful one, not just because of the prospective infant but purely for the wonderment of the occasion.

I support a woman’s right to choose by don’t ask me to switch of my emotions because of my gender nor my sense of loss if an abortion occurs within my circle. This has allowed me to empathise with the sense of loss felt by the women involved.

I would like to hold on to that.