Just Abortion theory

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

Who is being intellectually dishonest ?

The only women who get abortions that late have their lives greatly at risk. The majority of states outlawed third term abortions unless doctors verify that it is absolutely medically necessary to save life of mother, it is extremely rare.

The overwhelming majority of abortions are before 13 weeks when the life is an embryo not a fetus .

Even if you believe life begins at conception the life of an embryo is not equal to the life of an existing women most of whom have existing children according to credible data.

A majority of people support women’s reproductive choices and rights to abort as a matter of common sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who kill their own babies have mental issues; that’s why they try to make themselves feel better (as if) by creating threads about how abortion is “ok.” It’s not ok. It’s murder.

If you really think that then why do you want to force those women to become mothers?

PP doesn't actually think this. They felt hurt/rejection by some woman in their lives (a love interest, their mother, a sister, etc) and thinks all women need to pay for the hurt they felt. They're just broken.

You are completely incorrect on all counts. You are the broken individual, applauding women who destroy their own children.

Life is life. There are no degrees to life; you are either alive, or you are not. Babies are alive in their mother’s wombs. Abortion kills a baby. Sick people think it’s “health care.”

Health care doesn’t kill a baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

Who is being intellectually dishonest ?

The only women who get abortions that late have their lives greatly at risk. The majority of states outlawed third term abortions unless doctors verify that it is absolutely medically necessary to save life of mother, it is extremely rare.

The overwhelming majority of abortions are before 13 weeks when the life is an embryo not a fetus .

We may not actually disagree much then. Do you approve of states outlawing such abortions in this way? That’s something quite different than the radical “between a woman and her doctor alone” view often espoused on this thread.

I’m not being intellectually dishonest though. I think abortion is a difficult issue that poses very challenging line-drawing problems and that there are reasonable, well-intentioned people on both sides of the debate. Such people are often drowned out by those who insist it’s an easy issue with one obvious right answer that only bad people reject.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

Strawman.

People use “life” as an excuse to suppress and control women. If they actually cared about “life” they would care about the living people already here. But they suddenly don’t care once the fetus is delivered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who kill their own babies have mental issues; that’s why they try to make themselves feel better (as if) by creating threads about how abortion is “ok.” It’s not ok. It’s murder.

If you really think that then why do you want to force those women to become mothers?

PP doesn't actually think this. They felt hurt/rejection by some woman in their lives (a love interest, their mother, a sister, etc) and thinks all women need to pay for the hurt they felt. They're just broken.

You are completely incorrect on all counts. You are the broken individual, applauding women who destroy their own children.

Life is life. There are no degrees to life; you are either alive, or you are not. Babies are alive in their mother’s wombs. Abortion kills a baby. Sick people think it’s “health care.”

Health care doesn’t kill a baby.

If you actually GAF about “life” you’d try to understand why women choose to stop their pregnancies. Are you capable of doing this? Or you only capable of screaming “murder” which is an ignorant position.

And you really equate a fertilized egg to a living, breathing women?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

Who is being intellectually dishonest ?

The only women who get abortions that late have their lives greatly at risk. The majority of states outlawed third term abortions unless doctors verify that it is absolutely medically necessary to save life of mother, it is extremely rare.

The overwhelming majority of abortions are before 13 weeks when the life is an embryo not a fetus .

We may not actually disagree much then. Do you approve of states outlawing such abortions in this way? That’s something quite different than the radical “between a woman and her doctor alone” view often espoused on this thread.

I’m not being intellectually dishonest though. I think abortion is a difficult issue that poses very challenging line-drawing problems and that there are reasonable, well-intentioned people on both sides of the debate. Such people are often drowned out by those who insist it’s an easy issue with one obvious right answer that only bad people reject.

Yes I would agree with prior laws that only allowed voluntary abortion while fetuses are non viable outside the mothers womb at around 23 weeks or in some states even earlier at 16 weeks. After that medical rationales should be required. That is what happened for the most part anyway .

The abortion bans are a disaster for everyone as maternity services are leaving red anti abortion states in droves and criminalizing women who need abortions for just reasons .

[Anonymous]

Women don’t get the anatomy scan until 20w. Any ban before 24w isn’t realistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

Strawman.

People use “life” as an excuse to suppress and control women. If they actually cared about “life” they would care about the living people already here. But they suddenly don’t care once the fetus is delivered.

That’s absurd. It’s perfectly consistent to oppose the affirmative taking of an innocent human life while still taking the view that it should otherwise be left to find its own way in the world. Being opposed to murder does not obligate you to support welfare programs for those not killed, and being opposed to theft does not commit you to economic redistribution programs to benefit those who otherwise might have stolen. “You’re not really in favor of private property because you are willing to let some people have very little.” It’s just a category error. You’re not even wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Women don’t get the anatomy scan until 20w. Any ban before 24w isn’t realistic.

92% of abortions are prior to 13 weeks and many states had limits on voluntary abortion at 16 weeks. Most of the rest were done by 22 weeks. Only a tiny minority were conducted during third trimester and almost always for medical reasons. It was much more realistic than what the anti abortion states have now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/report/key-facts-on-abortion-in-the-united-states/#Who-gets-abortions

* More than half of abortions were among women of color. Black women comprised 39% of abortion recipients, 33% were provided to White women, 21% to Hispanic women, and 7% were among women of other races/ethnicities.
* Many women who seek abortions have children. Nearly six in 10 (61%) abortion patients in 2020 had at least one previous birth.

The vast majority (92%) of abortions occur during the first trimester of pregnancy according to data available from before the Dobbs decision.

Before the 2022 ruling in Dobbs, there was a federal constitutional right to abortion before the pregnancy is considered to be viable, that is, can survive outside of a pregnant person’s uterus. Viability is generally considered around 24 weeks of pregnancy. Most abortions, though, occur well before the point of fetal viability.
* Four in ten (40%) abortions occur by six weeks of gestation, another four in ten (39%) are between seven and nine weeks, and 13% at 10-13 weeks. Just 8% of abortions occur after the first trimester.
* Prior to the decision in the Dobbs case, almost half of states (22) had enacted laws that ban abortion at a certain gestational age. Most of these limits are in the second trimester, but some are in the first trimester, well before fetal viability.


https://prochoice.org/wp-content/uploads/women_who_have_abortions.pdf

Age
Women between the ages of 15 and 19 account for about 19% of all abortions; women 20 to 24 account for another 33%; and about 25% of abortions are obtained by women who are 30 or older4. Calculating abortion rates, older teenagers and young adults have the highest abortion rates, while women younger than 15 and older than 35 have the lowest.

MYTH: Women have abortions for selfish or frivolous reasons.

The decision to have an abortion is rarely simple. Most women base their decision on several factors, the most common being lack of money and/or unreadiness to start or expand their families due to existing responsibilities. Many feel that the most responsible course of action is to wait until their situation is more suited to childrearing; 66% plan to have children when they are older, financially able to provide necessities for them, and/or in a supportive relationship with a partner so their children will have two parents8. Others wanted to get pregnant but developed serious medical problems, learned that the fetus had severe abnormalities, or experienced some other personal crisis. About 13,000 women each year have abortions because they have become pregnant as a result of rape or incest1.

MYTH: Women are often forced into having abortions they do not really want.

Some women say that pressure from a husband, partner, or parent was one of several reasons they chose abortion, but only about 1% give that reason as the "most important" one in making their decision9. Conversely, some women who do not want to continue their pregnancies are pressured to do so by family members, friends, or fear of social stigma. Pre- abortion options counseling is designed to determine whether a woman is fully comfortable with her abortion decision, and if she is not, she is encouraged to wait until she has had a chance to consider her options more fully.

MYTH: Many women come to regret their abortions later.

Research indicates that relief is the most common emotional response following abortion, and that psychological distress appears to be greatest before, rather than after, an abortion.
There are undoubtedly some women who, in hindsight, wish that they had made different choices, and the majority would prefer never to have become pregnant when the circumstances were not right for them. When a wanted pregnancy is ended (for medical reasons, for example) women may experience a sense of loss and grief. As with any major change or decision involving loss, a crisis later in life sometimes leads to a temporary resurfacing of sad feelings surrounding the abortion.

MYTH: Women are using abortion as a method of birth control.

In fact, half of all women getting abortions report that contraception was used during the month they became pregnant1. Some of these couples had used the method improperly; some had forgotten or neglected to use it on the particular occasion they conceived; and some had used a contraceptive that failed. No contraceptive method prevents pregnancy 100% of the time.

Poster harping on about late term abortions - please read and grasp …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women don’t get the anatomy scan until 20w. Any ban before 24w isn’t realistic.

92% of abortions are prior to 13 weeks and many states had limits on voluntary abortion at 16 weeks. Most of the rest were done by 22 weeks. Only a tiny minority were conducted during third trimester and almost always for medical reasons. It was much more realistic than what the anti abortion states have now.

22w leaves very little time to have u/s scheduled, maybe get 2nd opinion, make decisions, and schedule procedures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

Strawman.

People use “life” as an excuse to suppress and control women. If they actually cared about “life” they would care about the living people already here. But they suddenly don’t care once the fetus is delivered.

That’s absurd. It’s perfectly consistent to oppose the affirmative taking of an innocent human life while still taking the view that it should otherwise be left to find its own way in the world. Being opposed to murder does not obligate you to support welfare programs for those not killed, and being opposed to theft does not commit you to economic redistribution programs to benefit those who otherwise might have stolen. “You’re not really in favor of private property because you are willing to let some people have very little.” It’s just a category error. You’re not even wrong.

So you’re a sadist. Got it.

Terminating a pregnancy isn’t murder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women don’t get the anatomy scan until 20w. Any ban before 24w isn’t realistic.

92% of abortions are prior to 13 weeks and many states had limits on voluntary abortion at 16 weeks. Most of the rest were done by 22 weeks. Only a tiny minority were conducted during third trimester and almost always for medical reasons. It was much more realistic than what the anti abortion states have now.

22w leaves very little time to have u/s scheduled, maybe get 2nd opinion, make decisions, and schedule procedures.

Prior to DOBs, 98-99% of women had abortions before 22 weeks … there was legal room for medical considerations after that if either life of mother or health of fetus is severely compromised after that time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women don’t get the anatomy scan until 20w. Any ban before 24w isn’t realistic.

92% of abortions are prior to 13 weeks and many states had limits on voluntary abortion at 16 weeks. Most of the rest were done by 22 weeks. Only a tiny minority were conducted during third trimester and almost always for medical reasons. It was much more realistic than what the anti abortion states have now.

22w leaves very little time to have u/s scheduled, maybe get 2nd opinion, make decisions, and schedule procedures.

Prior to DOBs, 98-99% of women had abortions before 22 weeks … there was legal room for medical considerations after that if either life of mother or health of fetus is severely compromised after that time.

I don’t trust ignorant legislators to tease this out.

But I do trust doctors.

24w is minimum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women don’t get the anatomy scan until 20w. Any ban before 24w isn’t realistic.

92% of abortions are prior to 13 weeks and many states had limits on voluntary abortion at 16 weeks. Most of the rest were done by 22 weeks. Only a tiny minority were conducted during third trimester and almost always for medical reasons. It was much more realistic than what the anti abortion states have now.

22w leaves very little time to have u/s scheduled, maybe get 2nd opinion, make decisions, and schedule procedures.

Prior to DOBs, 98-99% of women had abortions before 22 weeks … there was legal room for medical considerations after that if either life of mother or health of fetus is severely compromised after that time.

I don’t trust ignorant legislators to tease this out.

But I do trust doctors.

24w is minimum.

Well that was the federal standard pre Dobbs but many states enacted state bans at 16 weeks and even earlier. There was room for doctors to justify medical need later stages - but not common.

I would take 16 weeks over what the red states have now. So many women forced to give birth to children they can’t support - and endanger their ability to care for their existing children. The majority of women who aborted were single with other minors to care for.

The 24 criteria is ideal in terms of indicating medical non viability of fetus outside the womb .., However, IMO, this is not a hill to die on if the aim is to support as many women’s right to choose as possible in ways that a majority can live with. There have been studies in red states that most people do not feel Comfortable with abortions after 16 weeks or so unless it is medically indicated.