Kristy, I’ve known women who had an abortion because it was "easy"; I’ve also known women who agonized over the decision. I understand that there are a number of reasons that a woman might do it, and that is generally not an "easy" choice to make; the fact that it’s legal, though, has no bearing on its rightness or wrongness.

As for being glad of the right to refuse a husband’s advances, we’re now entering the "perspective game"; do we value the perspective of the person in power, or the person being affected? In Afghanistan, it’s considered the husband’s right to force his advances (just as it was his "right" to do so here not so very long ago); we now recognize the right of the woman to reject those advances. In America now, it’s the mother’s right to end her child’s life if she chooses; we don’t recognize the baby’s right to live. Do we have the power to control other human beings? Does a husband have the right to force himself on his wife? Does a mother have the right to end her child’s life? I say no, to both counts, and for the same reasons; people should be free to live their lives as they see fit, as long as they’re not harming another. A woman has the right to choose what she wants to do with her own body (her own!); not the husband. A baby has the right to live; once the parents make it, it’s not their decision anymore. That’s just my thoughts on the issue. You are right that the law sees it differently, just as it used to see the woman’s right to refuse her husband’s advances differently.