text: The question as to whether & when abortion might be right should be largely a scientific question!\n\nWHEN DOES LIFE BEGIN!\n\nBefore life begins - \nIt is OBVIOUSLY a woman's right to have an abortion.\n\nAfter life begins -\nIt is OBVIOUSLY killing a human to have an abortion.\n\nNot that makes things simple, but that should be the basis of the argument.\n\nThe arguments on both side are frequently emotional and not thought out.\n\n"Choose life; your mother did." The same logic can be applied to not using birth control.\n\n"It's not fair to bring an unwanted baby into the world."\nHaven't you heard of how many people are on a long list for adopting a child? This goes for all races now days. This argument only applies to handicapped kids. Then I wonder, couldn't you apply the same logic to the children after they're born? What is the scientific difference between a late-term fetus and a new-born baby?\n\n"The baby you want to abort could be the next Albert Einstein or Martin Luther King" or maybe the next Hitler.\n\n"My Body - My Choice" But the fact of the matter is (at least at some stage of the development) there is another human life IN your body. And in the vast majority of the cases, the woman had a choice before getting pregnant! Birth Control!\n\nYou may religiously believe life begins at conception, but you can't legislate by religion. \n\nAnd just because it isn't fair for a woman to have to have a baby she didn't want just because she waited to long into the pregnancy to make the decision, does that mean it's fair to kill the baby?\n\nEven in cases of rape or incest, the question of whether the fetus is a human life, or a lump of tissue should central.   I'm not trying to minimize the hell a woman would go through in this situation, I'm just saying the baby doesn't cease to be a baby (IF development is that far along).\n\nSo what I'd like to see is SCIENTIFIC DATA to determine when life begins.