Views on abortion run the gamut from those opposing all abortions to those willing to allow abortions under all circumstances. Perhaps the most logical views are the two extremes, prohibiting all abortions or allowing all abortions. Below I explain.
Prohibiting All Abortions
I have talked with women who state that feeling an unborn baby inside of them is a fabulous experience and they could not think of any circumstance in which they would sacrifice the life of that baby, even if it cost them their own life. That makes sense for persons who care about lives and are unwilling to take the life of another individual.
This makes more sense than for persons to oppose legalized abortion except in case of rape or incest. If one feels it is wrong to kill an innocent unborn baby, why murder the unborn baby just because it came into being through rape or incest?
Opposing all abortions may also make more sense than opposing abortions except when the health or life of the mother is at risk. Why deliberately murder one innocent life to help another life that may be at risk? After all, medical professionals cannot be 100% certain of how great the health risk is to the mother, but they do know with 100% certainty that an abortion will murder the unborn baby.
Allowing All Abortions
For some persons who think a fetus is not a living person or that unwanted babies would suffer child abuse, etc., allowing all abortions may be a logical view to hold.
For such persons it would make sense to have an abortion during the first three months of a pregnancy. But an abortion during the second three months or the last three months of the pregnancy could make just as much sense.
What if an abortion is botched and a child is born alive during a late term abortion? Such persons could logically support killing the newborn baby, since it is unwanted anyway.
What if a couple doesn't have an abortion, but after taking their baby home for a week decides they can't afford a child and don't want the responsibility of raising one. They might feel unable to care for the baby and desire to prevent it from suffering a long miserable life in their household. Maybe such persons could logically support killing a one-week-old baby.
Where does it end? Maybe at the very extreme persons could state (logically?) that on the planet Earth there is so much violence, pollution, selfishness, and other evil that to save the rest of God's vast universe, all life on the entire planet Earth ought to be aborted. After all, from a statistical point of view it is highly likely that somewhere in the vast universe advanced life forms far beyond those on Earth exist. If a map of the known universe (and the universe may be vastly larger than we know) were created that were a thousand miles wide and a thousand miles high, the planet Earth would be an extremely tiny dot too small to see with the unaided human eye. Would it be better for the universe if all lives on Earth were aborted or sacrificed as an effort to make the universe as a whole better and more successful? Perhaps someone could make a logical argument for this.
Best Solution? Eliminating or Virtually Eliminating Unwanted Pregnancies
The part above about aborting all life on Earth seems ludicrous to me from my biased point of view as a human being. I think all of us humans (or almost all of us) want to save life on Earth if reasonably possible. Since Earth is the planet I live on, I want to make it better rather than destroying it or life on it. And, in general, I think it is great to help unborn babies and others to live happier, healthier, longer lives rather than ending lives prematurely, though I desire for no one to suffer.
Even those who strongly support legalized abortion would prefer to avoid the risks, pain, and expense involved. Sexual abstinence would eliminate the need for abortions. Practicing abstinence can be a joyous life. Even many who claim sex makes them happy admit being unhappy for most of the 168 hours a week. In contrast, many who practice sexual abstinence feel happy and fulfilled.
However, if those who are sexually active but desire no children would consistently and properly apply effective birth control methods that would eliminate most desired pregnancies. Using the rhythm method to avoid having sex the few days each month when a pregnancy is most likely, combined with using both birth control pills and condoms consistently and properly, would virtually eliminate the possibility of a pregnancy occurring. Unfortunately, many sexually active people lack the discipline to keep the necessary records for the rhythm method or to abstain those few days each month when the female is most likely to become pregnant. Furthermore, many using oral contraceptives and condoms fail to take them consistently and properly. And even used consistently and properly, birth control pills and condoms are not 100% effective in preventing pregnancy.
So, the best solution may be sexual abstinence for those with the discipline to keep practicing it, as millions of people do.
NOTE: This article is virtually identical to one the author posted on another website earlier today (February 16, 2016).