"If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu
The thread is about legislating morality, and my point is that while laws can be, and often are, based on morality, legitimate laws are based on the promotion of a civil society. This is particularly true in nations, like the US, where we have the freedom of belief.
a better argument is this, medical occurences requiring abortion to save the mothers life are so rare and few that it can be tolerated... versus abortion for convienence, which is far more common.
there's nothing about cars or computers or genetically modified corn or what have you. you can argue the constitution espouses a philosophy of limited government involvement and as a result government shouldn't be involved in choice to abort, that would be a valid argument IMO but saying "the constitution doesn't recognize rights of the unborn" is, at least to me, not a great argument because it presupposes the founders even considered the issue.
I do not favor making abortion illegal BTW....