Any fair and intelligent editor would just hit “delete” on the question. The question isn’t designed to reveal any truths, and in fact is itself a sermonette that statesfalsehoods that you would love everyone to believe. Liberals are not the only ones that support a right to privacy and a right to choose. Liberals do not believe there is no life in the womb. We state the obvious legal fact that there is not a legal person in the womb with its own rights. (you can't issue a death certifcate for someone who isn't first issued a birth certificate. You can't be issued a birth certicate until you have been born).

The notion that the United States Government and the American Taliban need to keep their anti-American meddling noses out of our bedrooms and reproductive lives is not just a liberal stand. Barry Goldwater, who was the Arch Conservative Icon of the Republican party when I was growing up was a staunch supporter of the right to choose, as were most Conservative Republicans. Not all, but the major opposition to privacy then came from the Southern DEMOCRATS. This was the same bunch that supported segregation, opposed voting rights, separation of church and state and finally jumped over to the Republican Party. Most of the older Southern Republicans in Congress were democrats and switched parties. Good riddance to them.

Barry Goldwater was a staunch anti-communist so he knew what he was talking about when he said that the Christian Right was a greater threat to democracy than Communism. Goldwater said "I don't have any respect for the Religious Right. There is no place in this country for practicing religion in politics. That goes for Falwell, Robertson and all the rest of these political preachers. They are a detriment to the country."

"When you say 'radical right' today, I think of these moneymaking ventures by fellows like Pat Robertson and others who are trying to take the Republican Party and make a religious organization out of it. If that ever happens, kiss politics goodbye."

Barry Goldwater was a Prophet.

Goldwater said over and over again that the religious nuts were not true conservatives and that that would ruin our country.

“I can say with conviction that the religious issues of these groups have little or nothing to do with conservative or liberal politics. The uncompromising position of these groups is a divisive element that could tear apart the very spirit of our representative system, if they gain sufficient strength."

Talk about prescience. Nuclear options in the Senate, Judges appointed because religious nuts want them to strip away Constitutional rights, elected officials who think they should be able to conduct warrantless wiretaps, hold people indefinitely without charging them with a crime, and torture people to get information. This is the kind of thing that Goldwater warned up about. People can rationalize any crime when they do it in the name of God.

So don’t trot out your lies about support of choice being a liberal position or that we don't recognize that a fetus is living and a potential human. That is just another example of how when the Konservative Kristian Koaltion speaks in tongues, their favorite tongue is a forked one. They may have taken over the Republican Party, but they aren’t really Conservatives. They are religious reactionaries.

As Goldwater said, “The religious factions will go on imposing their will on others, unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. They must learn to make their views known without trying to make their views the only alternatives. We have succeeded for 205 years in keeping the affairs of state separate from the uncompromising idealism of religious groups and we mustn't stop now. To retreat from that separation would violate the principles of conservatism and the values upon which the framers built this democratic republic."

I believe that Goldwater would be so furious with the Religious Right today that he would be sitting on the Democratic side and take his fellow conservatives with him. I never thought I would live to see the day that I would say this but I wish Goldwater were still in the Senate to fight these guys.

Yawn. Oh, I am sorry, KeithS. Can you repeat that?

And last time I checked, a person who kills a pregnant woman can be charged with double homocide in some states.

Doesn't how can you murder something without a birth certificate?

My whole question was to remove religion from the discussion and ask: what does science say?

And please shorten your comments. I enjoy debating with you, but when you write dissertations in the comments section, no one reads them past the first paragraph. Honestly.

The left doesn't say there is no life inside the womb.

This is really very simple - a fetus is a living human being and science has proven that to be so. That fetus then has the right to life. And nobody has the RIGHT to end that life. Those who claim the right to "reproductive choice" are really claiming the right to kill another human being and that, my friend, is a really slippery slope.

Further, I fail to understand how - given the STDs rampant out there, including some that are life-ending - any responsible human being would fail to use BIRTH CONTROL. If you don't want to get pregnant and/or terminally ill, you use a condom AND you use the pill or the sponge or whatever choice you want to make. OR HERE'S A NOVEL CONCEPT - you could ABSTAIN.

Abstinence = 0 population growth!

Common sense says no.

No one includes time in the womb when they date their lives.

No one uses date of conception; they use date of birth.

Give it a rest. T'ain't human.