I respectfully ask pro-choicers to put themselves in position of someone who believes so much in their convictions that they would be willing to sacrifice to point of death, to uphold them. Do you understand that a fetus, barring any complications, will grow to point of complete independence? With that being case, do you understand why someone would say that life does indeed begin at conception? As a woman, don't you understand that having ability to abort a fetus isn't power, it's responsibility? That responsibility gets shifted off both man and woman, and is put squarely on you. By insisting that it is your "choice", you have, for all intents and purpose, removed father's responsibility to not only assist in making that decision but also to care for child, after birth.

Wouldn't a "culture of life" need to address issues like poverty, crime, responsibility and famine? How can we allow children to be born into an environment where mother can't afford to feed, clothe, educate and protect herself? Why shouldn't fathers have as much legal responsibility to their children as mothers do? Why should women have sole responsibility for making decisions about termination of pregnancy? Why should anyone be faced with decision to terminate because they have no support, no food, no money, no healthcare, no way to provide and no hope?

Before condemning someone for having opinions or convictions that they do, why don't you try to first accept reality that these problems are real and affect people from every race, culture and economic status, and that complete understanding of these problems is necessary, before any real world solutions can be formulated? Both sides should agree that these problems are real. Both sides have different solutions to these problems, as each of you understands them. Neither side is completely right or wrong. Neither side has all answers. Neither side is only holder of truth. You can either combat each other or combat problem. You can either accept that there are good people with strongly held beliefs on both sides of aisle, and that you both seek to solve these very human problems, or you can dismiss each other and leave these issues for future generations to fight.

The first step in process of coming to any answers is communication, understanding, and tolerance of one another. The first step towards having a "culture of life" would be to promote these values.

A possible DSM-like list of criteria for narcissistic organizations or groups:

An all-pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration or adulation and lack of empathy, usually beginning at group's early history and present in various contexts. Persecution and abuse are often causes - or at least antecedents - of pathology.

Five (or more) of following criteria must be met:

The group as a whole, or members of group - acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with group - feel grandiose and self-important (e.g., they exaggerate group's achievements and talents to point of lying, demand to be recognized as superior - simply for belonging to group and without commensurate achievement). The group as a whole, or members of group - acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with group - are obsessed with group fantasies of unlimited success, fame, fearsome power or omnipotence, unequalled brilliance, bodily beauty or performance, or ideal, everlasting, all-conquering ideals or political theories. The group as a whole, or members of group - acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with group - are firmly convinced that group is unique and, being special, can only be understood by, should only be treated by, or associate with, other special or unique, or high-status groups (or institutions). The group as a whole, or members of group - acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with group - require excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation - or, failing that, wish to be feared and to be notorious (narcissistic supply). The group as a whole, or members of group - acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with group - feel entitled. They expect unreasonable or special and favourable priority treatment. They demand automatic and full compliance with expectations. They rarely accept responsibility for their actions ("alloplastic defences"). This often leads to anti-social behaviour, cover-ups, and criminal activities on a mass scale. The group as a whole, or members of group - acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with group - are "interpersonally exploitative", i.e., use others to achieve their own ends. This often leads to anti-social behaviour, cover-ups, and criminal activities on a mass scale. The group as a whole, or members of group - acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with group - are devoid of empathy. They are unable or unwilling to identify with or acknowledge feelings and needs of other groups. This often leads to anti- social behaviour, cover-ups, and criminal activities on a mass scale. The group as a whole, or members of group - acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with group - are constantly envious of others or believes that they feel same about them. This often leads to anti-social behaviour, cover-ups, and criminal activities on a mass scale. The group as a whole, or members of group - acting as such and by virtue of their association and affiliation with group - are arrogant and sport haughty behaviors or attitudes coupled with rage when frustrated, contradicted, punished, limited, or confronted. This often leads to anti-social behavior, cover-ups, and criminal activities on a mass scale.