[avital2]

The Exodus reading involves damage to the baby/mother from another. It seems to me an altogether different moral equation when the mother herself intentionally decides to destroy life growing within her. This is a serious moral question, and I would maintain that there are better solutions for dealing with the perceived problem than destroying the life itself. We continue to deal with this problem as if it were happening in the 1970's when this discussion started with Roe. Women have a myriad of ways to avoid pregnancy now that are readily available, and, by the way, having a baby out of wedlock is no longer the social stigma it used to be. Can't we discuss this problem in light of advances rather than the same old rehashed 70's feminist line?

[cupcakes]

Bravo, I have stated the same thing numerous times. That we are relying on how things were back then and how options have changed considerably in the last 30+ years to the point that abortion should be obsolete save in extreme cases.