[mburbank]

It's all a matter of approach.

To appeal to the Republicans, abortion should be re-named Fetal Eviction and argued to in terms of property rights. If life begins at conception, than an individual is squatting illegally in a womans womb. While the child may have rights or not, certainy the actual, physical womb space is property owned by the woman. She can choose to rent it, gift it, or withold it as private property. The fetus has no rights allowing it to live there any more than a homeless child taking up residence in the womans garage.

The woman has every legal right to 'evict' the fetus. What becomes of it after that is no more her concern than it would be a landlords when a Katrina refugee can no longer pay their rent, or takes up residence in an empy building which is not for rent. It's very sad, but it is not the landlord's problem.

If we allow Fetuses to be able to sieze a womans property immediately upon conception, where will it stop? What prevents a homeless man from siezing an apartment, since without it exposure to the elements might cause his death? Why can't I simply move into any emoty house and claim it as my own for at least nine months? No decent Republican wants to set that sort of precedent, no matter how pro-life they may be.