[CatoRenasci]

Abortion is indeed perhaps the most difficult issue of our time. When Roe v. Wade was announced and I read the decision, I thought it represented a reasonable attempt to fashion a workable compromise between prohibiting abortions entirely and allowing any abortion without limit. My own views are probably more pro-life than they were 30 years ago, but I think the fundamental compromise: that in the earliest stages of pregnancy the balance of interests weighs towards allowing the woman to decide whether to continue the pregnancy or not and in the later stages of pregnancy, when the fetus has become viable outside the womb, the state must protect the interests of the unborn child.

Of course, the hardest questions are where to draw the lines, and that's why no consensus has been reached by the courts or legislatures. I'd always permit first trimester abortions -- they should be legal if not morally desireable -- and perhaps somewhat later term abortions in cases of rape or incest, or where the fetus is known to be seriously diseased or defective. I would be inclined to prohibit most second trimester and all third trimester abortions (except to save the mother's life, etc). I would also try to increase funding for adoptions, and even orphanages, so that poor women who did not believe they could care for their children could have an alternative to abortion.

[MinorityRepublican]

Of course, the hardest questions are where to draw the lines, and that's why no consensus has been reached by the courts or legislatures. I'd always permit first trimester abortions -- they should be legal if not morally desireable -- and perhaps somewhat later term abortions in cases of rape or incest, or where the fetus is known to be seriously diseased or defective. I would be inclined to prohibit most second trimester and all third trimester abortions (except to save the mother's life, etc). I would also try to increase funding for adoptions, and even orphanages, so that poor women who did not believe they could care for their children could have an alternative to abortion.

One of the things that I do not understand is why is late term abortion allowed to this day? If a seven months old fetus can live on its own outside of mother's womb, isn't that a living human being?

That is just wrong to abort that baby, anyone with a conscience knows that.

What is interesting is that the law does not consider a seven months old fetus as a human being, but rather as it is the property of the mother. That sounds familiar to Dred Scott decision in 1857 in which the Supreme Court declared that slaves are not human beings but that they are property.

[Celtjew Libertarian]

I think our view pretty well match up. I'd like to see the support for adoption and single mothers come more from private sources, but that's just my libertarian streak coming through.