But

"Michael Badnarik will:

Work to streamline the adoption process—get government out of the way of the best solution to unwanted pregnancy

Oppose tax funding for abortion

Oppose federal mandates that require companies provide abortion as a health care benefit

Oppose federal government control over the abortion issue*

Considerations:

Abortion is a volatile issue because we do not yet have a scientific determination as to the beginnig of life, so those who do not suscribe to a religious perspective on the issue insist that they or the courts may define the beginnings of life themselves. No one, legislatures included, possesses the authority to simply declare an arbitrary point at either side of which something can be declared alive or not without scientific proof. In the meanwhile, the better policy is to err on the side of caution.

Giving the federal government control of this issue could lead to more abortions rather than fewer, because the left-right pendulum of power swings back and forth. This shift could place the power to set policy in the hands of those who demand strict population control. The government that can ban abortion can just as easily mandate abortion, as is currently the case in China. Further, should abortion be found by scientific determination to be murder, this would be a state-level issue and not federal."

I think that makes more sense though as it is. My reasoning? The final provision is what, I believe, gives this issue a final 'answer', if you will, following the Constitution.