First things first. I want to thank all of you who have commented on my half-baked thoughts on the question of whether human life truly is sacred. Especially given the provocative tone of the piece, your comments and interactions with each other have generally been very thoughtful, respectful, and tolerant. Well done, and thanks for that.

Since only about one out of every thousand people who have viewed the original post has seen fit to comment, that moderate tone is especially surprising and encouraging.

Some have suggested that my original post was a little confusing in that it's not clear whether I'm arguing that human life isn't sacred or just that Western society doesn't function as if human life is sacred. Guilty as charged. Rereading what I wrote, I can certainly see how both those lines of thought are intertwined (entangled, some would say).

To clarify, I guess I'd say that I don't really have an opinion on whether or not human life actually is sacred, because the meaning of "sacred" is so personal. My purpose was more in line with the second interpretation, which was to point out all the contradictions inherent in the position of those who argue against abortion on the grounds that human life is sacred, and thus beyond any compromise or doubt. As others have pointed out in the comments, that position seems indefensible, given all the disregard for the importance and dignity of human life that's taken as acceptable and commonplace in Western society.