I think it is pretty clear you don't know what lifers are for or against. I would appeal to C. Evertt Coop's quote from above. Abortion is never the procedure that saves the mothers life. I mentioned a few instances where treating the mother for a given condition will result in terminating the pregnancy, but in those cases the end of the pregnancy is an unintended consequence, and not the procedure which saves the life. In the case of an ectopic pregnancy a woman's fillopean tube must be removed or it will rupture and kill her. The removal of the tubes has two consequences. One is intended, and the other is not. Saving the mother's life is the intended result, but the baby dies as a result of the necessary life saving procedure. Similar things can be said about a woman who is being treated for cancer while pregnant. The life saving procedures will almost always result in the termination of the pregancy. I have never once encountered anyone in the pro-life movement or seen any literature that would seek to disallow life saving procedures to try and save the baby.
If the govt. makes abortion "illegal" I want them to also make a tax deduction available before the child is born.
They are all correct words. The stages are cell, embryo, fetus, baby. Cell and embryo's are legal to abort. Fetuses and babies are not and never have been allowed under Roe v Wade except to protect the mother. Your inadequate grasp of the definitions of the words, "baby", "embryo", and "infanticide" are not my problem.
