Ok Gotwoot.
I figure this is one of the more controversial topics out there. And, as I love controversy, I've created this thread as a place for people to discuss this issue.

I've also added two polls, just to measure people's reactions. I know the polls are a little harsh and don't embrace all of the viable options in the debate, but by making them extreme I hope to get some good discussion going.

Let's just try to keep this thing civil. It's obvious that not everyone is going to agree. Lots of points and theories that are valid to one person won't mean anything to another. I honeslty think this is a subject that does not have a right answer. So don't get your panties in a twist if people don't accept your opinion.

I guess I'll start off with my opinion:

I'm Anti-Life (thats what the Pro-Life people could call it). That is, I believe that a mother/couple has the right to end the life their unborn child. Part of the reason is because children (and unborns) are property, yes it irks me to say it, but they are the property of the parent. Under property rights the parents are entitled to do as they wish with their unborn 'property'.

However, unborn children are also humans. Children have the right to all human rights, and the same should usually be granted to unborns. One basic right is the right to life. At the same time, parents are given a great swathe of freedom to choose "what is best" for their own children. Laws have been passed numerous times that assert that parents/guardians must provide basic standards of living for children.

So it would seem that property rights and human rights are at odds. Laws requiring parents to provide certain standards for children are at odds with laws giving parents the authority to raise their child.

Honestly I can only say that I'm Pro-Choice because I KNOW it is not my right to say whether or not some mother, some couple, MAY BE FORCED BY LAW to keep a child. I honestly don't think I have a legal right to force such an incredible requirement on others. I may make moral and ethical arguments for/against those people, but are those enough to give me the right to try to create law based on my morals?