>
> I think you know this is not a valid deduction. People will always continue to rape, pillage, and murder, and may do so in ways that endanger their own lives. By this rationale, if you were consistent, you would need to argue also for the legalization of the above crimes.
>

Like I said in the reply to Eric's post, please do not bring in the unfounded comparisons. Abortion is hardly rape, pillage, or murder (you may believe life begins at conception--That is your *belief*). Belief alone cannot be used to infringe on others rights. Unlike socially disruptive behavior like murder and rape, abortion is control over one's body. When life begins is only determined by what you believe, and cannot be defined.

> >Do you really want even *more* unwanted babies is this world?
>
> Wanted by whom? I guarantee someone wants them, if not their mothers.
>

Then go down to the abortion center and ask to adopt from the women waiting there. I can assure you that many of their families wouldn't care for them, and neither would the father.

> Many people don't honestly evaluate the logic of all their opinions. There are no exemptions from logic. If you prove me wrong, I should change my mind willingly and gladly, and vice versa. From this point, the only place to go is an argument about which religion is true, and thus, the one that should be followed. But this is, as you mentioned, a touchy subject. We'd never reach equanimity, let alone consensus.
>

Ahem, I *did* examine my logic. Let's not argue about that.

I agree, it cannot reach a consensus. My reason for writing this post is that I am tired of people trying to force their beliefs on me. The fact that religious beliefs is the argument in something which involves the law angers me.