It's the brain, stupid

No Republican presidential candidate can be much short of "life begins at conception" and hope to get through the primaries without a lot of finessing. Rudy Giuliani has to say the judges he would appoint would be the sort to have pro-life sensibilities and that we should all be federalists. Mitt Romney has to say he was against abortion after he was for it and hope he is believed:

One of the sharpest exchanges of the debate came over abortion and Sen. Brownback's attack on Mr. Romney for not being strong enough in his opposition to it. "It's truthful," Sen. Brownback said of an automated phone call his campaign made to highlight his rival's one-time support for pro-choice policies. "I am pro-life. I think this is a core issue for our party."

Mr. Romney called it "desperate, maybe negative," adding moments later, "I get tired of people that are holier than thou because they've been pro-life longer than I have." 

The Supreme Court has not short-circuited the debate on the end of life as it did on the beginning of life, so state-by-state debates have been moving to a common-sense definition. Respiration and heart activity don't matter -- when your brain dies, you die (alas, Indiana has not come around yet). Isn't it logical to define the beginning of life that way, too, with the development of the brain -- not claims of "brain waves" early in fetal life but with the arrival of the cebebral cortex that controls cognitive function? Such evidence can be misused by both sides and tweaked this way and that, but it would put the debate on a more medically sound footing than Roe vs. Wade did. Don't expect any candidate to embrace such a position; it's too pro-choice for the Republicans and too pro-life for the Democrats.