This topic is as, if not more, ideologically sensitive as the Nazism (which btw I would have broadened to Fascism for the sake of internationality and actuality in current politics) versus Communism.

Anything so much related to personal beliefs and ideologies - and a biological relation, half of mankind cannot possibly feel itself - is hard to discuss factually. (OK, maybe some of you do not want to discuss factually - but then its fictionally, and therfore not argumentative <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />)

Why is this a topic in our times? Because it is technologically possible.

In old times, when this was not possible, society had to find a way to cope with the problem of unwanted pregnancies (the argument for medical risks does not count here, as they were not known, respectively were accepted as an act of god or other force majeure) - and it did in a number of ways, some of which not nice at all.

Now we have advanced medical technology, and can "solve" the problem, quickly, cleanly, permanently. The issue is heatedly dicussed under aspects of ethics and morale mainly. But, the technological solution being available and the easy (and, sorry, "cheap") way out, the promotion of alternatives is lacking sadly. And often so, because the cost would have to be borne by society, and the soliditarity to carry the financial burden for the promotion and preservation of wealth is bigger than for the preservation of human life (if it is not one's own).

In times of crisis it is of the utmost importance not to lose your head (Marie Antoinette)