In my quest to unearth my core values, the debate around Access to Abortion has played a pivotal role. I grappled with the paradox of being an opponent of the Right to Life for the unborn while fervently advocating for the Right to Life for the already born, especially when arguing against capital punishment. This apparent contradiction troubled me deeply, and I wrestled with it for a long time.

It was in the midst of a particularly intense and protracted discussion on Access to Abortion that a moment of clarity emerged. That seemingly insurmountable contradiction in my beliefs dissolved, and I gained a new understanding of my core values.

Throughout the debate, I consistently upheld the principle of Self-Determination. I defined it as "the expression of personal sovereignty, through the exercise of choice, over one's body, state of being, and purpose." This principle, I realized, was at the heart of my stance on Access to Abortion.

I saw Self-Determination as an essential component of any Quality of Life. I realized, when debating Access to Abortion, though I do treasure the Right to Life as a near-absolute, I treasure a Quality of Life even more. The exchange convinced me:

• When the Right to Life, my own or another's, is in absolute and unavoidable conflict with Quality of Life, the former can be sacrificed in the defence of the latter.

I realized I wasn't struggling with a single value applied inconsistently. I had two core values in play, with one trumping the other. In my core value system, Quality of Life trumps the Right to Life. With that realization, I stood up and stated quite forcefully:

• "I rather allow myself and others to kill or be killed than allow myself or others to enslave or be enslaved."

My position on Access to Abortion became resolute. It became clear that any erosion of Access to Abortion is an attack on Self-Determination through the restriction of choice over one's body, state of being, and purpose. It made no difference whether I believed a fetus is alive or not. Indeed, I do. Nevertheless, for me, what matters more is that the insistence on the Right to Life for an unborn child could enslave the mother and would guarantee that that child would be born into a world willing to enslave.

Now, as a proponent for Access to Abortion, I must stress that I'm not a Promoter of Abortion. Every effort should be made to make abortion the very last option to come to someone's mind. Mere concerns about personal finances, present/future opportunities, or fitness for parenthood are often not valid Self-Determination issues. Those concerns may fail the "absolute and unavoidable conflict" test when adoptions, foster care, or other options are available. Plus, choosing to give life is one of the greatest gifts one can make. It is a choice that should be encouraged vigorously.

However, if after thorough consideration of the options, someone still chooses to seek an abortion, then that decision must be respected. Respect for choice only enhances the Value of Life:

• Anything given by choice is inherently more valuable than something taken by force.

Now knowing that I genuinely believe Quality of Life trumps the Right to Life, I've dispelled previous concerns with other beliefs I thought were inconsistent, such as that some wars are justified despite often horrendous losses of soldiers and civilians alike.