What most people support is women being allowed to make medical decisions with their provider without the input of idiot state legislatures.
The problem with limits based solely on the stage of pregnancy is that they all presume that we are only talking about elective decisions to terminate an otherwise normal pregnancy. But many health problems that many in the middle would deem as morally justifying the choice only manifest themselves in late stage pregnancy. There are other problems with arbitrary cut offs as well, all of which point to the relative uniqueness of many individual decisions. They make sense when only considering the conventional elective choice, but there are just so many other variables.
For such a smart person you sure have reading comprehension. Show me where I said anything about any part of the time frame discussion is reasonable? I said " we can disagree on the point of pregnancy but for the most part they range from 6 -20 weeks" What is telling about that? Is that not where nearly all republicans stand? Never said they were the same and didn't even imply that. You have yet to give a prominent Democrat that has suggested any restrictions.
This. 100%. A 15-week or 20-week ban is OK with two provisions. First, doctors, not politicians with no medical training, get to decide what is or what is not a medically necessary abortion. Laws that prevent a woman from getting an abortion until she is on death's door when doing the procedure a few days earlier would prevent this is a no-go. OBGYN's go through years of school, and many have years of practical experience. They are the ones who should decide what is medically necessary and what is not. Two, repeal the Hyde Amendment. 93% of all abortions happen in the first trimester already, so even a 15-week ban wouldn't change this. The #1 reason a woman waits longer? No money. That's because Hyde prevents any government funding for abortion. Repeal this and about 98% of all abortions will be first trimester. The remaining 2%? Those mostly fall into the medical necessity category. I think this is a compromise most can live with. But 6 weeks? Or only medical when the woman is on death's door and the decision made by some religious freak politician with no medical training? No thank you. Which is exactly what Ohio and Virginia said yesterday.
Oh, there is plenty of antisemitism on the alt right and we know it and we have called out the neo nazi's. It easy because they don't hide. We are now uncovering the hate from the compassionate left though. The really smart ones at the really smart colleges. And to you also, name the prominent Democrat that has called on any restrictions for abortions other than partial birth and I'll go away.
Biden says he's "not big on abortion" because of Catholic faith, but Roe "got it right" "Roe v. Wade cut in a place where the vast majority of religions have reached agreement," he said, noting that during "the first three months or thereabouts, in all major religions" the decision to obtain an abortion is between a woman and her family. Mr. Biden continued: "Next three months is between a woman and her doctor. The last three months have to be negotiated, because you can't — unless you are in a position where your physical health is at stake — you can't do it."
I'll ask you because you always way in, name the prominent democrat that has called for any restrictions on abortion after 15 weeks? 20 weeks? hell 30 weeks? Partial birth yes but not before!!
My reading comprehension is just fine. Your position (a false one i might add), is that dems are for unfettered abortion without regulation at all. Ergo, your response is that at least republicans are putting numbers on the board = automatically good compared to those do nothing dems. You don’t seem to understand laws and regs are already in place before these more highly restrictive policies, in some cases already restrictive policy. You then provided the 6-20 week range as if it’s just a fine point of debate. The problem is you don’t seem to understand the entire premise of your POV is a lie being fed to you (the idea women are getting abortions up the day before their due date). That just isn’t reality.
There was a bipartisan committee that proposed 24 months in the Senate backed by 2 Rs and 2Ds. After that, only cases where health of the mother involved. There is room to negotiate. Problem is, most of the R laws passed have been far too Draconian. 6 weeks, which is a near total ban. Medically necessary only when the life of a mother is at stake, which is different than the health of the mother. This ends up with doctors waiting until the woman is on death's door until a medically necessary abortion is performed, whereas it would have been much safer earlier. Given the choices, many Ds would prefer Roe to be reestablished over what the Rs are proposing.
Talk about intellectual dishonesty: the false narrative that the d party wants free access to abortion all the way to full term and even beyond and that they want open borders.
It may have been legislating from the bench. The judges did a better job legislating than most elected bodies.
This is really shown when the antiabortion zealots post pictures of the gestational ages of the fetus. Typically they misdate conception by months.
I've said this since R V W was overturned. This is a disaster for R's. It's been proven at the ballot box. The country wants 20-24 week abortions. Part of why I went Independent. Why R's continue to die on this hill is beyond me. It's a loser for R's and will be in 2024 as well.
"An unconstitutional dictate from on high". Apparently a majority of Americans are of that opinion regarding Dobbs, the elections yesterday being another indicator of that opinion.
Although the majority of American voters feel that whether or not to terminate a pregnancy should be a decision between a woman and her doctor (contrary to the right-wing narrative that being against a near absolutist ban is "pro-abortion") a majority of Republican primary voters are self-identified pro-lifers who believe that all abortions should be banned with the only exception being to save the life of the mother and only then (implicitly) if there is overwhelmingly medical evidence that continuation of the pregnancy would result in the death of the mother. To those voters there is no room for compromise and they would probably vote against any Republican primary candidate who suggests a compromise short of their absolutist position.
Although it may not be true, a segment of Republican primary voters still believe the DeSantis narrative.
Watch for Dear Leader pivoting on his abortion stance. As we all know he’s amoral and will do whatever it takes - lie, cheat, rape, manipulate, use. Maga will then soon follow him in lockstep.
