Maybe it is time to talk abortion? Facts: @31% of implanted embryos abort naturally.

To put it mildly, we disagree going in. A majority of voters have supported Roe v. Wade as it stands. Many are uncomfortable with the law as it exists and would like it tightened up, limited to earlier term pregnancies. Many others are sure it is murder of babies no matter when performed. Some who believe it is murder nevertheless condone it in certain circumstances, such as for victims of rape or when incest is involved. Some believe no exceptions should be made for the health, and even the life for some, of the mother.

Of special note, there is a significant movement in this election to define personhood as beginning at conception, which is supported by the GOP presidential and vice presidential candidates. Our decision of our next president will likely determine whether Roe v. Wade stands  and whether a definition of a personhood as beginning at conception is adopted.

Let's discuss our views about what a law on this subject should say and what its possible ramifications for men and women might be. 

For instance, in future, what should the penalty be for abortion if it becomes illegal? As Mr. Ryan said, when asked what he felt the penalty should be and dodging a specific answer, "but if it's illegal, it's illegal." 

If life begins under the law at conception: If a woman were ordered to bed by her physician for fear of miscarriage in the 4th month and miscarried after going skiing in the 6th month, should she be charged with manslaughter?

I included the natural abortion data because, in a very real world, we have to consider practical issues. Given that in nature some 50 percent of all fertilized eggs are lost before a woman's missed menses would have given a clue, should the law be able under any circumstance to charge women with manslaughter before them? How much later would be appropriate? Remembering that legal decisions are human products and thus themselves imperfect and frequently very inconsistent.