jeff, when it comes to womens rights, abortions whatever why cannot we be like that little island called manhatten and have some fun and lighten up rather than goung to the extreme like you just mentioned. just a couple of weeks ago the NY POST had an article about TROJAN, the condom maker giving away THOUSANDS OF FREE VIBRATORS. i never saw such happy women of all ages, sizes, shapes,orientation in all of my 69 years. they were to a lady young, old whatever delighted with the free giveaway. of course mayor bloomberg hadda step in and put the kiblosh on the deal but the uproar was so great from the women that he after a very short time he threw his hands up and allowed the promo to go on. can you imagine the blithering nitwit bagman mayor of boston approving this stunt. me neither and maybe thats why everyone is always so tight butted about every little issue with not a peep about such minor issues such as unemployment, underemployment and public education. course jeff the bif diff between us and the big apple is in manhatten they give away free vibrators. here , we simply reelect em. ma

There is nothing extreme about supporting the basic right of women to make the choice for themselves. There is a vast difference between what any individual might think and choose for herself, and what you, or I, or anyone should be willing to impose on a woman using governmental powers.

what a horrible dillema. It's too bad we can't figure out another way to produce babies. Take out the fun part and what have you got? Left overs for the trash can.

Abortion takes up way too much of the discussion during election seasons. It's the same every year. It crowds out discussiion of other more important issues such as the forgotten, endless and pointless war in Afghanistan and of course the economy. On the one hand we need to acknowledge that abortion is here to stay and the businesses that provide that service such as Planned Parenthood are here to stay. On the other hand we need to stress that the decision to have an abortion rests soley with the woman and man involved as does their responsibility to pay for it. If they want to invite their families, their clergy or their doctors into the decision making process, fine, but leave the government and the rest of us out of it.

I have often found it "curious" that those on both sides of this issue who make the loudest noses and who decried the position of the other side so vociferously are mostly men? Especially, since this is totally and ultimately a women's issue, which should and must be decided by women. The loud-mouthed, pedantic males in this country - who, of course, ALWAYS know what's best for women - should just butt out and shut up! There should be a national referendum on abortion - one voted on by women ONLY - that would decide this issue once and for all. I think that most women in this country are able and willing to protect their own reproductive rights, I just don't know if the men who are in power are secure (or mature) enough with themselves to allow this to happen. Probably not!

Finally, someone who tells it like it truly is. Thanks- another reason I'm an Independent. The 2 party system always reduces the options to the lowest form.

"If you're like most Americans, you believe that abortion is morally wrong. You oppose abortion on demand. You think abortion should be legal only in certain circumstances." / / / I suspect if, god forbid, Mr. Jacoby's mother, wife, or daughter was impregnated as the result of a rape he might see this issue in a very different light, and written a different piece. / / / One third of Democrats are "pro-life"? That's an under-estimate. 100% of Democrats are in favor of life, but, 2/3 of them also believe that a woman has a right to control her own body and her own life.

When a contoversy does not favor Repubs they muddy the waters and talk re "both parties" to deflecy from legitimate criticism of Repubs.

"...we need to acknowledge that abortion is here to stay and the businesses that provide that service such as Planned Parenthood are here to stay..." Uh, have you read the Republican Party platform. You cannot be so cavalier. These rights are only 'here to stay' if we protect the rights of women by voting to protect it from a rabidly self-righteous right that talks about freedom, but acts like the Tailiban.

As the old joke line says, "If men got pregnant, then abortion would be a sacrement."

Jeff, your sober, thoughtful analysis is once again right on the money. Both sides have some extreme views on this, and, in reality, neither side has much power to enact legislation to affect abortion. It is all politics. It is all about seeking t gain political advantage. But nothing about abortion will actually change. NEW PARAGRAPH: The reason for all this caterwauling is that Roe V. Wade effectively removed the issue of abortion from the political process, where it rightfully belongs. Prior to this decision, states had the right to allow or disallow abortion, or to set rules for it. People actually had the power to enact the rules on abortion that the people wanted. Now, thanks to a very bad decision, the fight about abortion is all rhetoric. NEW PARAGRAPH: The last refuge of liberalism is always the courts. When they are unable to sway voters to their way of thinking, they end up in court, and hope to sway the court. The meaningless squabbles we are seeing on abortion today is a direct result of this.

Not so fast Mr. Jacoby. Once again you use false equivalency and obfuscation to advance your argument. Readers need to know -- and you failed to mention -- that when you reference the polls from the American Enterprise Institute that the AEI is a leading right wing think tank. So, their polls are undoubtedly skewed and constructed to towards results that lean towards conservative ideology. Also, considering everything is relative, your assertions that planned parenthood is the nation's leading abortion provider are misleading considering that it's abortion operation represents somewhere between 1-2% of all the services it provides in women's health. You portray it as though it's their main function which could not be further from the truth. There's no doubt that most liberal leaning or democrats don't favor abortion as a method of birth control, but believe, as you do when it comes to the issue of gun control, that taking away any right to abortion would lead to repeal Roe v. Wade – thus a fundamental right taken away. Surely you and other likeminded conservatives can relate the equivalence of the two considering this is the typical gun advocates argument against any sort of gun control. And the idea that providing abortion is a public expense is rather specious considering the public expense placed on tax payers who generally foot the bill when unwed, low income mothers have children and then rely on the state to pay for both mother and child – a certainly greater cost than an abortion. This aspect of the argument seems a bit callous, so let's not go there either. The fact is that the right is on the extreme on this one, as it usually is. That's why your party is always walking back their statements or apologizing or clarifying what they supposedly profess represents the ostensible "majority" of opinions.

RICHMOND12: "It is all about seeking to gain political advantage. But nothing about abortion will actually change." WRONG: the next president could well have the opportunity to nominate a justice to the Supreme Court, and if their most recent appointments (Roberts, Alito, Thomas) are a guide Republicans will probably select an ultra-conservative poised to overturn Roe v. Wade. RICHMOND12: "...Roe V. Wade effectively removed the issue of abortion from the political process, where it rightfully belongs." WRONG: In our system of government the judiciary plays a key role in defining and calibrating the relatively general expression of rights enumerated in the Constitution. It is hard to think of a right more basic, or a privacy interest more compelling, to a woman than sovereignty over the cells in her own body. RICHMOND12: "The last refuge of liberalism is always the courts." WRONG: Two words: 'Citizens United'.

Richmond12 said, "The last refuge of liberalism is always the courts." So does that mean you disagree, for example, with the ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, which said that state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students are unconstitutional? Or how about Loving v. Virginia, which held that state laws prohibiting inter-racial marriage are unconstitutional? Oh, and what about Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, the ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court that legalized same-sex marriage? Are all these rulings related to civil rights invalid in your view because "liberals" may have challenged the status quo in these cases?

If believing that murdering children is an act that no one has the "right" to "choose" makes me an extremist and a fanatical, then so be it. Those who called for the immediate abolition of slavery were looked at as fanatics and extremists too. There were many both in the North and the South who wished they'd just shut up about that controversial slavery thing and focus on the economy and expanding the country, you know, "the important stuff." Someday our descendants will look back in shame at the mass genocide this country has perpetuated in the name of choice, just as we look back in shame at slavery. I only pray that I live to see that day.

53 MILLION Killed in under 40 years. 1.21 MILLION killed every year. Over THREE THOUSAND killed EVERY DAY. It is 9/11 EVERY SINGLE DAY OF THE YEAR for unborn AMERICANS. Yes, Mr. Jacoby, I'm an extremist who is horrified that her countrymen are slaughtering some of their most vulnerable citizens for convenience. If that's what it takes to be an extremist in this country these days, then I wear that badge with pride.

Peter Singer, contemporary philosopher and public abortion advocate, joins the chorus in his book, Practical Ethics. He writes: "It is possible to give 'human being' a precise meaning. We can use it as equivalent to 'member of the species homosapiens'. Whether a being is a member of a given species is something that can be determined scientifically, by an examination of the nature of the chromosomes in the cells of living organisms. In this sense there is no doubt that from the first moments of its existence an embryo conceived from human sperm and eggs is a human being." Naomi Wolf, a prominent feminist author and abortion supporter, makes a similar concession when she writes: "Clinging to a rhetoric about abortion in which there is no life and no death, we entangle our beliefs in a series of self-delusions, fibs and evasions. And we risk becoming precisely what our critics charge us with being: callous, selfish and casually destructive men and women who share a cheapened view of human life...we need to contextualize the fight to defend abortion rights within a moral framework that admits that the death of a fetus is a real death." (Naomi Wolf, "Our Bodies, Our Souls," The New Republic, October 16, 1995, 26.)