HELL NO! At 20 weeks the fetus cannot feel pain. ABORT! Abortion should be elective up to the 20th week.
most abortions are had by Christians, many of which are against birth control or their parents were if Christians stopped having abortions, the rate of abortions would be cut by over 3\4 instantly
from a Christian site..... "7 in 10 Women Who Have Had an Abortion Identify as a Christian" https://research.lifeway.com/2021/1...have-had-an-abortion-identify-as-a-christian/
another "Religious school grads likelier to have abortions" https://www.nbcnews.com/health/heal...l-grads-likelier-have-abortions-flna1C9437875
I saw the political and legal patterns established decades ago as a harbinger of very bad news for pro choicers and women. All of this was very predictable because we were losing ground in state legislatures consistently even before we started losing in the courts. The complacency of many pro choice advocates, who always assumed that Roe was some unassailable unbreachable Citadel wall on which they could depend, was blind stupidity and arrogance. they were too self assured without seeing the big picture. Women had been losing their rights to abortion for two decades because abortion clinics were closing far faster than they were opening.
That's mostly a myth. Maybe what you mean is that a 10 year old girl cannot "safely" give birth. It's hard to find any specific statistics, but I suspect the maternal mortality rate for a normal vaginal delivery, even for a 10 year old, is still below 3%. Obviously the rate would be lower with access to modern medicine and cesarian section. And the maternal mortality rate would drastically fall off at ages just a few years older, 11, 12, and 13 years old. By 14 years old, mortality is no greater than it is for a 40 year old woman.
Yeah, I know that most abortions are in the first trimester. And most are performed through the abortion pills. So what is your point-- that because 91% are w/in the first trimester, there need be no laws governing what the other 9% do? You are presumably aware that abortion laws are of great interest, and controversy, to a lot of people-- even should any such law only affect a small number of cases. That is why I had been suggesting what I thought could be seen as a reasonable compromise-- compared to the current state of affairs. I'd already known, also, that about 99%, are w/in the first 20 or 21 weeks. Again, I don't see how this applies to my post, other than to support what I'd contended about most people: that they would draw the cutoff line, sometime in the second trimester (from 13 to 26 weeks).
I don't believe there is any compromise possible. Laws that have impact can not help but damage women's healthcare. They expose doctors to second guessing by prosecutors. Thus we see obstetricians and their training moving out of states with these post Roe laws, as well as seeing records of women being referred to other states when there are believed to be contestable legal issues. Telling women that they have to go out of state because they have serious health issues while being pregnant a healthcare atrocity. Compromise is something that always must be considered when there is disagreement. So, one can't criticize the hope for this to succeed. But, the issue here has to do with congresses and prosecutors seeing themselves as being able to write and prosecute laws to impact every healthcare issue where a fetus is present. It's just flat out unbelievable that a congress could proclaim itself to have that capability. Healthcare decisions have to be made by the woman and her doctor. She has rights to personal bodily autonomy. We give people legal healthcare authority over others who can't speak for themselves. How could we possibly deny healthcare authority of a woman over her own body?
Oh God... Please, don't do this! Just don't! This is what happens when you think a ZEF is a baby -- A child will then be an adult and next thing you know, you are advocating pdf file-ry. Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude.
