Submitted by John House, May 14, 2007 23:54

"Pro-lifers" assert a right to life, but make no concession for the possibility that duty to care for a child, to meaningfully educate the child, or to meet healthcare costs involved in birth and child rearing may be beyond many persons' means or desire.

"Pro-choice" advocates ignore a different set of issues. In ignoring them, they unintentionally but inextricably link the value of life to the resources one or a few individuals may have to sustain it. There would be no hope for Moses in that line of reasoning.

Until children are seen as a social asset, and their care and support as a social responsibility, this issue will be an irreducible conflict.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.