Here is another opinion to not care less about. This is absolute nonsense.
You are so committed to decrying what you consider a religious view, that you fail completely to look at the legal view.
Moral issues are based upon a whole variety of perspectives. For some, euthenasia is moral, for some, pedophilia is moral, for some killing people of a particular race is moral, for some taking what one person owns to give to another who has less is moral.
Itś all irrelevant before the law and Constitution. These actually are what compels behavior, whether one considers them, moral or not.
Rights that are not variable, are not revokeable apply to every person under the Constitution. Primary is the right to life.
roe v. wade, the abortionists license, denied this right to unborn children in two ways. First, it conjured up an unenumerated right to privacy by cobbling together bits of amendments to shield the killing of the unborn from the law.
Because of this shield, the law cannot ¨ see ¨ the act of destroying the baby.
Second, it arbitrarily decided that the unborn child is not a person, but only for the purpose of abortion.
In other contexts, like the murder of a pregnant woman being a double murder, the unborn is a person, you cannot be tried for murder if you haven´t killed someone.
The Supreme court has never made a blanket ruling on when one becomes a person in any and all cases.
Any biologist or obstetrics physician will tell you that a persons life begins at conception, progresses through being an embryo, to a so called fetus, to a birthed baby. All stages of being a person.
If my moral position would be what I am advocating, I would demand no abortion at anytime. But I have no right to demand that others comply with my morality.
So, I legally support unlimited abortion in the first trimester when the baby is in essence is a clump of non specialized cells.
On the other hand, when the baby is recognizable as such, a person, with a beating heart and can most likely feel pain, they have the right to life under the Constitution.
If you are not an American, you probably live in a democracy.
The US is not a democracy, it is a Constitutional Republic.
In a democracy, the ,majority rules or the government shoves stuff down your throat.
Free speech is curtailed because someone might have their feelings hurt, the press and media are subject to government control, the rights of assembly and association may limited, because in the world of situational ethics, anything can be deemed as right or wrong.
The rights in the Constitution are unalienable. They apply 100% at all times. There is no right to kill someone except in self defense or an execution, or as a result of war.
No matter all the situational ethics diatribes about handicaps, post natal care or cost.
One cannot void another´s right to life.
An unborn can be a person in one context, but not in another, this hypocrisy in the law will be corrected by the Supreme court.
It has nothing to do with my moral view of anything. The equation that some atheists and non fundamental Christians support killing the unborn, and most Conservative Christians do not because of a moral position does not apply here.
It is an unresolved legal issue, and in my view legally, babies are being murdered because they are inconvenient to someone, their right to life under the Constitution is being egregiously being denied to them