Well said, Chris!

NatPo has a pair of columns today on abortion. (I hadn't noticed that it was a slow news day.) Babs does her usual hand-wringing that I won't bother linking to, but Chris Selley makes an interesting point about the value of the fetus versus that of the woman.

In June, Gallup asked Americans to identify themselves as pro-choice or pro-life, and then ran some scenarios by them. Among the pro-lifers, nearly 70% think abortion should be legal when a woman’s health or life is in danger — meaning, logically, that they value an adult life over one in utero. Even more interestingly, 35% of self-professed pro-lifers think abortion should be legal in the first trimester, 59% think it should be legal in cases of rape or incest, and about a quarter think it should be legal when the baby might be physically or mentally impaired. Abortion equals murder? Not for these “pro-lifers.”

A majority of fetus fetishists agree that so-called fetal rights are subordinate to women's rights.

He then draws the inescapable conclusion.

The law is far too blunt an instrument to impart any wisdom on this endlessly complex and emotional issue. When the vast majority of people believe abortion should be legal in some circumstances, the only legal demarcation between medical procedure and murder that makes any sense is the one we have now: Birth.