Truett,

When you say "think twice before sex", what you mean is, "be stuck with the consequences of having had sex without the intention of conceiving a child." No couple is more reckless with regard to sex because they figure they can just have an abortion, and to suggest that that is the case is ludicrous.

Secondly, who's talking about kids? Most abortion patients are grown women. It may be easier for you to imagine that this is all about unwed pregnant teens who thought it would be fun to spend a little time in the back of their boyfriend's car (and who certainly would have refrained if only that incredibly easy, accessible, and reasonably pleasant option of abortion didn't offer them solace), but that's just not the case. We're talking about adults here- adults who do not generally consider abortion a reasonable argument in favor of unprotected sex.

Third, inappropriate sex? This is the one thing many anti-abortionists are loathe to admit. It's not really the abortion you're against; if you or your daughter or a friend were raped or victimized or otherwise made unwillingly pregnant, or if your fetus tested positive for down syndrome, you would probably turn a blind eye on the whole fetal extraction thing.

What you're actually against is this notion of "inappropriate", "irresponsible", outside-the-bonds-of-marriage sex, and because you're against sex between unmarried partners, and because you consider it to be inappropriate and reckless, you want those people to suffer the consequences that you think they deserve: an unhappy pregnancy and an unwanted child. And somehow you've twisted the whole thing around in your mind in order to convince yourself that banning abortion will somehow encourage people not to have the kind of sex that you don't think they should be having anyway.

And as far as a "right and wrong way to view sex" goes, illustrating sex without marriage as an act reserved for "dogs on the street" is definitely the wrong way.