I think exactly zero state will outlaw abortion of ectopic pregnancies, or otherwise cases where the pregnant woman is at significant risk of dying.
What will happen is some states will criminalize aborting healthy pregnancies beyond a certain point, such as with the "heartbeat" laws.
My personal opinion is based on body autonomy. A fetus is obviously a developping human life and the better option that should always be suggested to the mother who dosen't want a child is giving it for adoption.
Going waaa waaa about not wanting the "emotional trauma" of doing that is a non-argument. You already made the human life and want to kill it to tell yourself the lie that it never happened.
However you have body autonomy and if you want to be an asshole, you can "evict" the human you refuse to carry and feed within you and let it die. The moment the foetus is viable outside the uterus means abortion is straight-up murder, though.
Objecting "but even before that, you consented to carrying it when having sex!" Is a weak argument, as then you have to start making exceptions for rape. ( But birth control fail argument is moot if the sex was consensual.)
The other end of the spectrum argument for late-term abortions because "some women didn't know they were pregnant" is so morally repulsive it pains me. 1- You now knowing it means it was not burdening much at all. 2- How does that give you the right to kill someone? It dosen't. You just want to relieve your emotional discomfort and pretend this human life you made never haplened. By killing someone who could live outside you already.
Oh and late term abortion for rape victims is also morally repulsive and cruel murder. The human carried by the woman did not rape her. It is innocent and can now survive if extracted shall the asshole wanting it dead stop consenting to carry it. So extract it without killing it. Early term abortions fall back into the body autonomy argument for abortion.
It's real funny how a lot of the weight and responsibility of bringing the life into the world is placed on the man who fertilized the egg. The same rules of "you shouldn't have had unprotected sex if you didn't want to care for it" conveniently get forgotten when it comes to the woman's role in procreation.
Female supremacy or the soft bias of lowered expectations? Guess that's up to the reader to decide.
Untill men can surrender paternal responsabilities and rights, aka "legal male abortion", if they don't want to be a father for a window period after being informed they concieved...
We are not equal under the law where women can drop their newborn no strings attached, or can abort their foetus.
And although I disagree there, some Men's Right Activists want the father to also be allowed to terminate their foetus in a pregnancy they do not consent to as long as women are allowed to.
Untill men can surrender paternal responsabilities and rights, aka "legal male abortion", if they don't want to be a father for a window period after being informed they concieved...
This would bother me less if the RIGHTS were the same. That is, a "father" can be ordered to pay money for 18 years but not be awarded any time with the child.
The other end of the spectrum argument for late-term abortions because "some women didn't know they were pregnant" is so morally repulsive it pains me.
I have understood, before the current level of lunacy, that late-term abortions were for people who didn't realize they were pregnant, AND it turned out the baby was severely deformed/non-viable. Like no face or brain, organs all on the outside, etc. Something that should have been spontaneously miscarried or would have been caught in a normal ultrasound.
I think exactly zero state will outlaw abortion of ectopic pregnancies, or otherwise cases where the pregnant woman is at significant risk of dying.
What will happen is some states will criminalize aborting healthy pregnancies beyond a certain point, such as with the "heartbeat" laws.
My personal opinion is based on body autonomy. A fetus is obviously a developping human life and the better option that should always be suggested to the mother who dosen't want a child is giving it for adoption.
Going waaa waaa about not wanting the "emotional trauma" of doing that is a non-argument. You already made the human life and want to kill it to tell yourself the lie that it never happened.
However you have body autonomy and if you want to be an asshole, you can "evict" the human you refuse to carry and feed within you and let it die. The moment the foetus is viable outside the uterus means abortion is straight-up murder, though.
Objecting "but even before that, you consented to carrying it when having sex!" Is a weak argument, as then you have to start making exceptions for rape. ( But birth control fail argument is moot if the sex was consensual.)
The other end of the spectrum argument for late-term abortions because "some women didn't know they were pregnant" is so morally repulsive it pains me. 1- You now knowing it means it was not burdening much at all. 2- How does that give you the right to kill someone? It dosen't. You just want to relieve your emotional discomfort and pretend this human life you made never haplened. By killing someone who could live outside you already.
Oh and late term abortion for rape victims is also morally repulsive and cruel murder. The human carried by the woman did not rape her. It is innocent and can now survive if extracted shall the asshole wanting it dead stop consenting to carry it. So extract it without killing it. Early term abortions fall back into the body autonomy argument for abortion.
That's for the secular argument anyway.
It's real funny how a lot of the weight and responsibility of bringing the life into the world is placed on the man who fertilized the egg. The same rules of "you shouldn't have had unprotected sex if you didn't want to care for it" conveniently get forgotten when it comes to the woman's role in procreation.
Female supremacy or the soft bias of lowered expectations? Guess that's up to the reader to decide.
Untill men can surrender paternal responsabilities and rights, aka "legal male abortion", if they don't want to be a father for a window period after being informed they concieved...
We are not equal under the law where women can drop their newborn no strings attached, or can abort their foetus.
And although I disagree there, some Men's Right Activists want the father to also be allowed to terminate their foetus in a pregnancy they do not consent to as long as women are allowed to.
This would bother me less if the RIGHTS were the same. That is, a "father" can be ordered to pay money for 18 years but not be awarded any time with the child.
I have understood, before the current level of lunacy, that late-term abortions were for people who didn't realize they were pregnant, AND it turned out the baby was severely deformed/non-viable. Like no face or brain, organs all on the outside, etc. Something that should have been spontaneously miscarried or would have been caught in a normal ultrasound.
This is even assuming roe v wade is overturned which I still don't believe is going to happen.