McGrath, since you brought it back up, I'm going to respond. I believe that it is not a moral contradiction to differentiate between a life that is purely innocent (such as each unborn child certainly must be) and a life that has so debased itself that it has totally lost respect for life, to the degree that such a person willingly and intentionally takes the life of another person solely for selfish personal reasons. Therefore it is not a moral contradiction to be anti-abortion ("pro-life" being a euphemistic expression meant to play on emotion, at least as much so as "pro-choice") and pro-capital punishment.

To inject religion into the argument: Suppose a person has a sincere belief that the only way to expiate the sin of murder, and thus escape eternal damnation, is for the murderer to have his own life taken by society. Suppose a person who has such a belief, at the culmination of a long period of weakness, takes the relatively innocent life of another. Suppose that, having realized what he has done, this murderer feels true remorse and rather than live, desires to pay for his sin in the prescribed manner. Would it be just and merciful to deny such a person the opportunity to pay (as he believes) for his sin by being executed?

To remove religion from the abortion argument: There are currently (in the US) three legal categories of taking human life: capital punishment, self-defense, and illegal homicide. Capital punishment is legal only when the person being killed has been duly convicted of a capital crime. Killing in self-defense is legal only if the killing person has reasonable cause. These first two categories of taking human life are justified under the law. The third type of killing is, by definition, never legal. Now, to focus on abortion, or termination if you please. The question is, is termination taking human life? Unless you appeal to religion (i.e. arguments about when the soul enters the body), the answer is definitely yes. Why? Because a human fetus is human life. A human embyro is human life. A human blastula is human life. A human zygote is human life. It is human because it carries the human genome. It is life because the cellular processes are functioning. So the next question is, under what law can termination be justified? Clearly it cannot be justified under the law that allows capital punishment, since at no stage has an unborn human been capable of committing a capital offense. Therefore, the self-defense category must be used to justify termination. This leaves open the legality of termination when the life or health of the mother is endangered by continuing pregnancy.

Since D&X cannot be justified as the best medical option for protecting the life or health of the mother, according to the AMA, there is no reason for that particular procedure to be legal. Therefore Clinton's statement after vetoing the ban is, while technically the truth, just as disengenous as many of his other famous statements.

End of soapbox-standing.

Jon W.