Abortion and Women's Rights

Abortion has nothing to do with women's rights.  Murder is not a right. 

The only thing that distances a human from a lump of flesh is a level/faculty of sentience that only - I mean only- can be found in humans. When so few of abortions take place once this may be a possibility, I think pro-choicers have less to be ashamed of than pro-lifers, whose hard-assed, almost always diametrically opposed stance has made feminists et al. completely incpacitated to budge on theirs. I agree that abortions should not take place once a foetus has been developed to a limit I've defined now (human life has nothing on human being, of which human-only cerebral faculties are a prerequisite), but the outright ban most pro-lifers suggest tie my hands; that alternative is an attack on civilisation. The debate on abortions is so nebulous and incremental, so I think this is what should be reached; a ban on abortions after a certain time, coupled with complete lack of regulations before a certain duration. This is quid pro quo, a compromise through gritted teeth both for those completely espoused with ultra-feminist rethoric and religious/ethical snafu. However, education regarding intercourse and gestation must improve substantially, the cultural view of teenage sexuality, especially the difference in perception of male/female sexuality, must change. Birth control and morning after pills must improve in quality and accessability, and politicians on both sides should follow suit and welcome these changes.
This is what I want, but since you, dear Anon, are not representaive to your crowd, I can not approach it at all, because a mixture of acceptable/non-acceptable abortions is preferrable to no abortions at all, and that is what most of the pro-lifers want.