I will weigh in on this debate, but only to this extent: President Bush is not inconsistent just b/c he believes abortion is the taking of a human life while he agrees with legal exceptions for rape and incest.
On the former he is taking the correct scientific and moral position as to what constitutes human life.
I disagree with those who say it is not taking human life if it is a first trimester abortion. Or a morning after pill...whatever. But with all things you have to look at the possible, which is what Bush is doing. Most abortions are not because of rape and incest. Outlawing most abortions would be a tremendous advance. Nobody else has come close to getting this done since Roe.
Bush knows that outlawing all abortions except for life of the mother would be a poison pill and doom chances everywhere of drastically limiting abortions. If he disagrees with the SD bill, that is why. It is not b/c he thinks every rape and incest case should end in abortion. He just is not willing to propose a LAW OF THE LAND at this point to outlaw abortion even in such cases. For very real and valid pragmatic reasons.
Again, it is not that he favors abortion in such cases. There is a huge difference, whether some of you people want to admit it or not.
Care to comment?