Define "selfish".

Now, I certainly would NOT argue that there aren't any of what you would call 'convenience' abortions. It happens. However, the vast majority of abortion happen in the first few weeks - this is why the 'viability' argument gets tossed around. And although I don't have the numbers, finances plays a HUGE role in it. One broken condom or a woman who gets sick and doesn't realize that antibiotics will nullify effects of The Pill for a time and you suddenly have someone going "I'm WHAT?"

But there's a discussion that doesn't seem to happen beyond the initial "'fer it, or a'gin it" shouting.

Let's say abortion is banned - and for the sake of argument let's ignore for a moment the resulting illegal aboritons that would happen. Let's also ignore the whole rape/incest/mother's-life argument for a moment.

So now you're forcing these pregnancies to term by rule of law.

The fact is a lot of people can't afford to properly care for these children (abortions are also disproportionate among minorities). What do you do at that point? If you're one of the conservatives who might have a "Can't Feed 'Em? Don't Breed 'Em!" bumper sticker on their car - what do you do at that point?

Do you provide public aid? Do you think adoption will solve the problem? If so, there are over 5,000 kids in the Greater Boston area that would disagree with you as they're waiting (they're just not the kind of babies that most adoptive parents want).

Do you take the kid away? If so, doesn't that go against the Conservative mantra of less government?

Again, abortion is the symptom - the 'disease' is unwanted pregnancies.