[Cronos]

At the same time, the “inviolable value of each human life” does not imply that no abortion can be moral. Here the case of rape is especially relevant. It is hard to claim that a rape victim has a moral duty to bring to term a pregnancy forced on her by rape,

This is a traditional red-herring put forth by proponents of baby-killing.

I refute them with the statistics about Poland -- Poland until the 90s allowed pretty liberal abortion, but then reduced it to allowing abortion only for:

1. rape
2. incest
3. mother's life or health
4. foetus life

And how many abortions does it have a year? about 840. That's in a nation 1/10th the size of the US

By that reckoning, if the US allowed only abortions for the above cases, then there would be only 8400 abortions a year. Even if we assume a 100% increase for the US, that should be max 17,000 abortions a year.

In contrast, the US had a million abortions a year....

So the rape, incest etc. accounts for only about 1% or 1.7% of the abortions. The rest are just as "don't want baby"

[allendale]

The problem with the rape exception is that you are still accepting the summary execution of a human life for reasons not germane to that life. There are of course better more humane solutions to the so called “rape” scenario, but they would never be considered in moral relativism of today.