"The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:

‘The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death.

‘The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. http://... As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights.'

Rather than alienate people by adding my opinions on abortion, I will just point out the hypocrisy of most "pro-lifers."  If you are "pro-life" then you should be against the death penalty, war (in all forms), vegetarian (while both plants and animals are "alive" you can't tell me that a cow is less alive or sentient than an unborn child), and should essentially dress as an extremely devout Jain (a South Asian religion that places an exceptional value on all life) complete with the facial mask to prevent killing microbes in the air.  Additionally, they should also support socialism (maybe not the "scientific" that evolved during the 19th century with its stress upon rationalism and secularism).  We live in industrial society, which has both the capability of providing for everybody as well as being predicated upon continual improvement social fluidity (this is something completely unknown until the 18th and 19th centuries), and since it has this capabiltiy to continuosly provide for all, then "pro-life" people should support all social welfare programs and government spending to help provide basic means of existence for everyone else who is alive.  Abortion isn't pretty, but it certainly seems to support a sliding defintion of what "life" and morality towards others is.

I absolutely believe in a womans right.  THE RIGHT TO KEEP HER LEGS CLOSED!!!!  You also have the right and responsibilty to take preventative measures.  You dont even have the right to "murder" yourself.  Did you know that if you attempt suicide and fail you are fined and probably thrown into a looney bin - so if they CAN THROW YOU INTO A FACITILY AND CLASSIFY YOU AS "CRAZY" if you  try to kill yourself or even for those people who "cut" or "self mutalate"  how come your not crazy for injuring or killing  something in your body - Y just cause you cant see it - I dont believe in abortion at all, but sometimes i'm torn, becasue if a person could do that - would you really want them raising a child anyway - the kid is MUCH better off

seeing as we can't decide when life begins, then it is impossible to come to definitive that abortion is murder. So I will say. NO

everyone has the right to their own beliefs... but to base your beliefs on a fictitious book seems as dumb to me as this thread being on this site to begin with... im sure there are other forums where this could be discussed... i don't come to active.com to read a argument about the rights of unborn fetuses