Good to see this debate still going on. Eddie, you actually hit the nail on the head with your point about semantics. When I lived in Pennsylvania and had my experiences with my wife’s illness, I attended 3 public town hall debates on abortion, and the semantics were the entire issue. The “religious” leaders (not the Catholic priests, who came across as quite liberal in this crowd) argued that no termination of pregnancy should be legal because too much leeway could be given by a doctor just to perform the abortion. Who was really “at risk”? A cancer patient? A diabetic? A 14 year old? They insisted that one exemption would be liberally applied to almost anybody with a doctor’s note, and we would be back to unlimited abortions. The other side was that making any abortions illegal would en up overriding a doctor’s recommendation and interfering with a life saving procedure. This is the nature of the debate. You understand the semantics, but many people do not, and some of them are politicians.