It makes perfect sense to ask people who argue that banning abortion is in the best interests of kids, how they will prevent these kids from growing up in misery, crime and poverty.

This is not a reason to kill them. A life, once conceived, has its own intrinsic value that can't be mitigated by the material circumstances that might affect it. No matter how miserable or impoverished a person's childhood might be, that child has a potential contribution to make, and a right to live.

The only logical way to argue that banning abortion is not in the best interests of kids is to argue that there is such a thing as a child being "better off dead," and that it is possible to make that determination before the child is even born. Even on its surface, that is obviously immoral, and that's before we get into discussing who makes those determinations and what criteria they use to do so.

It makes perfect sense to ask whether people who argue that banning abortion is in the best interests of kids, how they will prevent these kids from growing up in misery, crime and poverty.

This is not a reason to kill them. A life, once conceived, has its own intrinsic value that can't be mitigated by the material circumstances that might affect it. No matter how miserable or impoverished a person's childhood might be, that child has a potential contribution to make, and a right to live.

The only logical way to argue that banning abortion is not in the best interests of kids is to argue that there is such a thing as a child being "better off dead," and that it is possible to make that determination before the child is even born. Even on its surface, that is obviously immoral, and that's before we get into discussing who makes those determinations and what criteria they use to do so.