He also believes he doesn't have the right to use the force of law to
make others live by his beliefs.

So if I believe that forcing people of other races into slavery is "a bad
thing", I certainly shouldn't try to "use the force of law to make others live"
by this belief. If I believe that people of the Jewish religion shouldn't be
gassed by the government, I certainly shouldn't try to "use the force of law to
make others live" by this belief. Certainly if I believe that killing women
for showing their faces in public is wrong, I shouldn't try to "use the force
of law to make others live" by this belief. Just which beliefs do you think
CAN be given the force of law?

People who do force their religion on others are called fanatics, or
maybe Ayatollah.

I hate to burst your little anti-religion bubble, but opposition to abortion is
not a religion or a religious belief. Just because many religious people share
that belief doesn't mean you can't reach that conclusion logically and without
any leaps of faith. In fact, there is no logic to a legal structure that says
you can't kill a baby 1 second after it has been fully delivered, but it is
just fine 5 minutes earlier. I do not know of any logical argument that can
find the point prior to birth that the mass of cells becomes a human being. So
if it appears logical to you that the mere occurance of delivery annoints the
child as a human being then you are the religious one relying on a leap of
faith for your position. Otherwise, let me know, via logic, when that moment
arrives that the non-sentient mass of cells becomes a human being.

Dave Hall