The abortion question is definitely an important and controversial ethical issue, and one which demands that strongly held moral opinions need to be respected, even if one does not agree with them.

I too, am convinced of the sanctity of life, and that it must be preserved at all cost. But just what is life? I have no religious beliefs, I do not believe in the existence of a spirit or a soul. For me, human life is human consciousness. The physical body, whether it be a zygotic mass of cells, or the dead shell of a human kept alive by medical life support equipment, has no sanctity for me. The term "potential for human life" of an unborn foetus has no meaning for me.

A human being is the sum of his experiences and memories. We can call this the "spirit" or "soul" for lack of a better term, but it is not a noun, it is more like a verb. What makes us human is the sense of self-consciousness. It is totally dependent upon the physical body, and I am convinced does not survive it. It is not the body, but cannot exist without it. So when does that undifferentiated mass of cells become human? When it becomes self aware? at birth? when it is capable of reacting to stimuli? when it realizes it is separate from the world? when it develops language?

That's a dangerous question. In some world views, even an egg or spermatozoan is a "potential" life, and deserves legal protection. In fact, even the urge to procreate is a potential human, and anything that frustrates it, such as homosexuality, masturbation or contraception is a form of infanticide. In my opinion, if this view is sincerely held, then even abstinence should be considered a form of abortiion.

In the law, we must have a clear boundary, so we have drawn a line between humanity and biology at roughly the point where the foetus can survive outside its mother's body. But should that survival be assisted by medical means? In general, abortions are legal in the first trimester. But it must be admitted, medical science is advancing and the point where the embryo is totally dependent on the mother is being pushed back. With in-vitro fertilization and implanting, it can even be argued that the line can be drawn prior to conception.

My personal opinion coincides with present law, that humanity begins in the first trimester. This is not a scientific opinion, just a personal preference that combines my determination that women have the unnegotiable right to control their reproductive behavior as they see fit with the equally self-evident idea that we should not have the unrestricted ability to kill those we find inconvenient. I am perfectly aware that my position is somewhat arbitrary, and that the valid and sincere opinions of others are not likely to coincide with mine.

I also feel that both contraception and sex education are perfectly and unambiguously acceptable from a moral point of view, and that those opposed to these practices (which would reduce the number of abortions enormously) are probably more opposed to sex than they are to death. Moral opposition to abortion cannot be dismissed out of hand. Moral opposition to contraception and sex eduction is superstition.