Using your logic- women could kill their young at ANY time, even after birth, because it was "nature". Why does that "right" stop at birth for only humans?

Do you realize that the vast majority of fertalized eggs are rejected by the woman's body? Only a fraction of fertalized eggs survive to conception.

If the death of a fertilized egg is murder, and the act procreating has a strong risk of this "murder" taking place, then logically it would be highly immoral for anyone to ever have children.

What is Pol Pot's mother had him aborted? What if Stalin's mother had him aborted? What if Idi Amin's mother had him aborted?

"What if your mother had you aborted?"

There is no "what if", because it didn't happen, and if it did happen then I wouldn't be here to complain about it, now would I? Nor would Pol Pot or Stalin or Amin, if they were aborted. But then they wouldn't have committed mass executions, would they?

It's a woman's right to choose. If a woman cannot financially provide for the child, and it is born into an abusive household with poor medical care, no good upbringing and no healthy family relationships, you're basically sentencing that child to be tortured and possibly end up a deranged individual as an adult. But that's if we're talking about possibilities, which isn't even the meat of the issue.

The core of the issue is right of choice, right of women to have control over their bodies. It's that simple.

If my mom had me aborted, then my parents probably would have gotten divorced a lot sooner and they both might have had much happier lives. But I really have no idea how it could have turned out. That was just a guess. One thing I do know for sure is, I wouldn't have minded, because I wouldn't exist. Furthermore, If you fundamentalists are right, I would be in heaven instead of not existing, which I hear, is even better than living.