Sure, let's discuss it ". . . as a philosophical issue that is more about morality, responsibility, integrity and before the fact."

Morality is a human construct. It is whatever a community of people decide it is. You may believe that sex outside of marriage is immoral, but the facts suggest that a majority of people either don't believe it's immoral or don't care. And that includes a large percentage, perhaps a majority even, of church going alleged Christians. Bringing God and the Bible into the conversation is just silly because many people don't believe in that God or the Bible or choose to give both low station in their lives. Personally I regard religion as irrelevant to the discussion.

The scientist in me tells me that sex is a biological imperative, not a religious one. So pragmatically speaking, let's set this morality, God, and the Bible aside since even the people who preach it don't act it, except possibly Mike Pence. And sex largely for the purpose of procreation? Who are you trying to kid? Have you been living under a rock? I don't know about you, but most men and women engage in sex for sport. And I don't mean that in a negative way. Among humans sex is part of an intimate emotional connection. It definitely serves a purpose other than procreation; it is indulgent, but it's only reckless, irresponsible, and ignorant when practiced outside that emotional connection.

Abstinence is the best solution only if you deny that humans are sexual beings. Sex education is a good idea because stupid puritans don't inform their kids and then act surprised or get mad when their kid either gets pregnant of gets someone else pregnant. Sex ed makes for fewer STDs and unwanted pregancies, but it doesn't prevent sex. Nothing does. Deliberately ignorant puritans refuse to get it. People have sex, always have, always will. Accept the reality and decide how to live in that reality instead of dwelling in denialism.

Having an abortion may be doubling down on a bad choice in your case, but others see it as a logical course of action to an unwanted or dangerous pregnancy. I know my place in this arrangement, and it's not to judge another's personal decision in such a personal matter. Apparently you have the right to dictate how others, particularly women, should behave. News flash: you don't!

I too like a society where people take individual responsibility. I see the decision to have an abortion as a person exercising just that - personal responsibility.

I'll grant you that white men founded this country. Most weren't old. And the conservatives were the Tories, many of whom moved to Canada rather than be part of a revolution. Rebelling against the King is the direct opposite of conservative. (Conservative: resists change; slow to change.) And the Founders should have, and did have a say in the bedrock policies of the country. They also recognized the inevitability of change, and allowed for that. So that was then, and this is now. Women have been demanding equal rights at law for over a hundred years. Men, being the stingy bastards that they are, along with a lot of duped women, have resisted that change.

And just to be clear, it's stupidly offense to accuse me of wanting to control women's bodies to maximize their sexual value for me and other men to abuse. Talk about an unfounded cheap shot. Welcome to being a modern Republican for whom there is no bar too low that you won't cross it.