This is my opinion as well and why I support abortion, even though I would hardly say I LIKE it. I don't think anyone except twitter attention whores "like" the idea of aborting something that could eventually become a sentient human being.orange808 wrote:
Time limit for babies (because we don't like losing them) and allow procedures for mothers (because we don't like losing them).
Putting a time limit on it is a compromise that makes young girls make a decision before the baby develops too far. The troublesome debate here is the fact that there's a thing inside a woman that cannot survive on its own and taking resources from the mother against her will. In that state, the moral argument becomes splitered and entirely subjective. There's no agreement and there never will be.
The compromise was already established and it wasn't "extremism".
Allowing the procedures protects women with unwanted pregnancies from having a baby, but that's not by biggest concern. My worry is young girls going to dangerous unlicensed quacks for dangerous procedures that lead to extreme harm or death. Girls will seek out dangerous providers and get hurt if we don't have an outlet.
There are a lot of legal decisions we make, not because we think they are fucking awesome, but because the consequences of not doing so are much worse. Legalizing liquor doesn't mean drunkenness, including drunken driving, are FUCKIN' SWEET BRO. It's a compromise. Same as cigs. Same as weed, now. Drunken driving kills. Cigs cause lung cancer. Weed turns people into hippies. All quite unpleasant. But outlawing these things creates a thriving criminal underground which provides the same products to the same customers, but without any safety measures, regulation or legal oversight.
People who want to have abortions will have them. Abortion, by which I mean "I don't want to have a kid, so fuck it I'm not going to," has existed in some form for as long as humans have. There are historical examples everywhere. You cannot ban abortion. Bans don't work. People who can't afford to have kids or do not want them are going to find a way to not have them. There are also legitimate medical scenarios where the mother's life is in jeopardy, or the child was created through traumatic criminal activity. It's unjust to subject victims to repeated violations, just because they had the misfortune to be victimized. And I do value the life of a fully-grown woman above that of a fetus, so a choice between the mother and child is a choice I will always make for the mother, if life is at stake.
The big problem with banning abortion is it's a moral high horse that accomplishes nothing. Banning abortions doesn't actually ban abortions. It just drives law-abiding citizens to underground, criminal establishments. Christocrats need to understand this. Your ban on abortion ultimately does nothing. It creates a lot of suffering and misery while not changing meaningfully anything about our country or people. Whatever point you think is being made is not.
If signing an abortion ban into law meant that the finger of god would come flying down from heaven to poke someone in the eye whenever they thought about aborting, until their eyes were so red and swollen they had no choice but to capitulate and have the child? Then maybe you'd have an argument. Even then, inflation is still sky-high and the working class is poorer than ever. Do you really want homeless people forced to pop out huge families? That's where we'd be. IF a ban could even work.