There are few subjects in America that cause as much stress and conflict between family members or political adversaries today than the issue of abortion. Much of this debate focuses on how an individual interprets religious doctrine. We are not here to argue about "God." This is a matter of faith, not a debate for reason or science. If you believe in God, we respect your right to your faith. If you are uncertain or unclear about God, or a confirmed atheist, we respect your right to your views as well.

Yet we begin by stating our overarching guidelines: no human being alive today has better firsthand knowledge about the existance of God -- or God's non-existance -- than does anyone else. We are all on equal footing here. If you do not agree with this basic premise, the remainder of this discussion is not applicable to you.

Second, we believe the public has an obligation to work toward reducing abortions, similarly as society focuses on reducing smoking, drug or alcohol abuse, gambling, prostitution, violence or crime.

Third, similar to smoking, drinking or even gambling, we respect the individual's right to make the difficult decision regarding an abortion. We do not believe it is your neighbor's position nor the government's role to make this decision for an individual.

The crux of the abortion issue focuses on when life begins. Some people claim life begins at the moment of conception. They believe a new life begins at the moment the male's sperm fertilizes the female's egg. Other Americans support different timelines for the origin of life. Unfortunately, science gives us little clarity on this point. Most of us would agree that after six months, for example, the fetus is a living human being. None of us can demonstrate scientifically whether a two week old fetus meets this standard.

A second point of contention focuses on the taking of a human life. The anti-abortion coalition claims it is wrong to take a life. Yet a significant number of these activists support capital punishment and war. This inconsistently does not help their case.

Yet even strict anti-abortion advocates accept that abortion is acceptable under certain conditions. In general, they consent that it is acceptable to allow an abortion in the rare case where the life of the mother is judged to be at risk. We have included an article published by the BBC about a Polish woman whose health was at risk due to her pregnancy. Poland has some of the strictest abortion policy in the world today. We highlight the Catholic church's exceptions to Poland's abortion restriction.

We believe there is little argument about points #1 and #2. Nearly all human beings accept these exceptions. We turn to point #3 to illustrate the complexities of the abortion issue.

Even in one of the world's most strict anti-abortion cultures, they allow for an abortion in the case of a pregnancy due to rape or incest. And, we all agree that rape or incest is unacceptable.

Yet the primary stated reason for outlawing abortion is the value we place on human life. While a woman is indisputably wronged in the case of rape or incest, how about the innocent fetus?

Regardless of the atrocious crime of rape or incest that led to the pregnancy, a life has formed. We may want to put the offending male in jail or assign a suitable financial punishment, but how can the religious right justify killing this tiny human being?

The developing human baby has done nothing wrong. The developing baby is not at fault here.

The bottom line is if you subscribe to the belief that life begins at conception, then allowing for exception #3 is illogical. And, this is why we do not believe the government or public should be allowed to play a role in whether a woman chooses to have -- or not have -- an abortion.

We urge you to study the article below and decide for yourself if this is the type of governmental intrusion we want in our lives. Do we want self-appointed experts of "God" to tell us when life begins? Do you want a committee to decide whether you live or die? Does Washington or your local statehouse belong in either your bedroom or a woman's vagina?

Polish Woman Fights Abortion Case

A Polish woman who was refused an abortion despite warnings that having a baby could make her blind is taking her case to Europe's human rights court. Alicja Tysiac's eyesight worsened drastically after she had her third baby, and she fears she will go blind.

In staunchly Catholic Poland, abortion is illegal unless the health of the mother or unborn child is at risk. Ms Tysiac is arguing that she ought to have been entitled to an abortion on therapeutic grounds.

When she became pregnant for a third time in February 2000, three eye specialists told her having a baby could put her eyesight at serious risk. All, however, refused to authorise a termination of her pregnancy. Two months later she visited a gynaecologist to ask for an abortion. He also refused.

Abortion curbs
Ms Tysiac now wears glasses with thick, powerful lenses, but cannot see objects more than a metre-and-a-half away.

As a disabled single mother, she finds it a struggle to raise her three children on her own, on a pension of 140 euros (£96) a month.

Poland has some of the strictest abortion laws in Europe.

The European Court of Human Rights cannot throw out Poland's laws, but it could rule that Ms Tysiac's rights have been violated.

The head of a group that is fighting to change Poland's abortion laws has told the BBC that very few women are able to terminate their pregnancies.

"The practice of the Polish abortion law is even stricter than the law itself," Wanda Nowiska, from the Polish Federation for Women and Family Planning, said.

"So in Poland we have no more than 200 legal abortions per year. That shows the magnitude of the problem," she said.

Abortion was widely available in Poland under communism.

Following its collapse, a resurgent Catholic church sponsored legislation that said a pregnancy could only be terminated in three circumstances:

• Where it could save the mother's life
  
  
• Where the foetus was irreparably damaged
  
  
• Where the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest.