The fringe of each end could learn from that mindset. I meant that as a reply to mchammers post. Agreeing with him made me mentally disheveled.
The fringes have a logic that can't ethically be compromised. If you believe life begins at conception, you pretty much have to be rigid on there being no abortion allowed except to save the mother's life. If you believe in absolute "bodily autonomy," no abortion can ever be stopped regardless of how far along the pregnancy is or how routine it is.
Personally, I genuinely agree with the pro-life activists. I think it does begin at conception. However, that belief is balanced with a few things. First, I fundamentally respect federalism. I demanded states' rights to restrict abortion and ripped the busybodies who try to crap on them. Finally, those rights are no longer being denied, and I'm not going to now become one of those busybodies and screw with states that disagree with me. States' rights means just that - states' rights, and upholding them respects the rule of law and avoids civil war. The sooner everybody accepts that, the better off we'll all be.
Second, I respect the legislative process and the political realities that surround it. I would rather ban as many abortions as I can than hold up the entire process to get 100 percent of what I want.
It's like the rape issue. When pro-lifers say it's not the baby's fault that it was conceived through rape, they're right. It isn't the baby's fault, and it's an injustice for it to be aborted. However, would I turn down a chance to save the 99 percent of babies not conceived in rape because I can't save the other 1 percent? No.