That you expect anger means that you don't understand most RW on this issue. It's a frequent problem. Some social-science research shows that those on the left are on average far more certain about other people's political motivations than those on the right; they're generally more certain of RW's motivations even than other RWs are. I find this a curious result about aversion to uncertainty and hardening of political boundaries, but there it is. Anyway ...
Monty Python satirized Catholics and many thought the satire true: Every sperm is sacred. A lot of people simply don't get satire. It's like Gulliver's Travels: If you don't have a certain level of background information it doesn't make a whole let of sense.
For HL and not a few other on the RW, it's fertilized eggs. If they should naturally fail to implant or spontaneously abort, that's the way it goes. You don't argue with Mother Nature or Father God. Even if you do something by accident to cause a spontaneous abortion, oh, well: accidents happen and even atheists draw a distinction between intentional transgressions and accidental transgressions (for most things). But intentionally artificially blocking a likely implantation or triggering an abortion is screwing with Mother Nature and usurping Father God. In a world in which there is some sort of Grand Design instead of random chance, but humans are free to screw with that Grand Design because God has given them the opportunity to mess up, this makes sense.
= new reply since forum marked as read
