13 week fetus vs dough

I find it funny that some states that just banned abortion totally disregarded obtaining a vote from the people who live in their state. If state governments were required to obtain a vote from the people before placing a law into action, then we might have a government that operates on the will of the people over the will of the politician. I find it sickening that politicians are getting in-between a woman and her OBGYN who sometimes need to make heart wrenching split decisions. It is also difficult for the women who is carrying a delayed developed fetus but cant obtain service from their doctor because of abortion bans. I know that some women go on to carry their mutated pregnancies to full term, and then bring a life that suffers through a poor quality of life or mortality within weeks months or years. Those women are super moms. But not every woman wants to go though that. And sometimes women with complications die. No statesman should ever remove the liberty of a licensed OBGYN to advise a women to prevent further complications from obtaining services. They have a legal obligation to preform OBGYN services when necessary. Even when abortion services might not be seen as needed by regular people, a woman suffering mental health issues seeking an abortion should also have access to services. This can be a life or death problem. What is sickening is that most doctors are dealing with women who are pregnant and on antidepressants, anxiety medications, on top of so many mental health drugs. We don't live in a world today where the medical field recommend not medication use during pregnancy. It is also dangerous for some women to carry a child while on certain medications. So what than? Who's at fault if a women gets pregnant while on a medication taken for a chronic illness? Although most of those drugs recommend taking birth control while on the specific medication. These women can still experience unwanted pregnancies. Is politicians going to mandate doctors a list of medications women can't take because they might get pregnant? Or a list of medications women need to stop taking if they become pregnant? Are these politicians going to keep collecting taxes on purchases from baby dippers, baby gear, baby supplies, kids clothing, toys, school supplies, and then collect tax on women's health products, and prenatal vitamins? Do we need to make sure a politician is present when a woman gets her yearly exam because of OBGYN shortage?

Typical liberal - compares the miracle of life to yeast.

Typical moron, falsely assuming a person's political ideologies based on a single data point.

You don't think it's a little cold to compare a human in development to dough?

Oh and thanks for what you said before. I never got a chance to reply.

They're both pretty cold until they've had enough time in the oven. (All irreverence aside, I fully acknowledge that even an embryo is human life.)

I just think 1) until it can survive outside the womb at around 20 weeks, it is there at the mother's pleasure and 2) my own personal feelings towards the extremely serious and weighty issue of abortion cannot and should not restrict other people's choices.

Until month 4 or so, I don't see a problem. Sure it's murder. So's eating meat. Sure it's human life. So's capital punishment. Sure it's innocent. If people spent half the time they spend trying to criminalize abortion on helping people who've already been born, say innocent children in orphanages or foster care because their parents didn't fxcking want them, that would do much more to protect innocent human life...but, just because I think this way doesn't obligate anyone else to.

Well, like I said before I can respect that you at least respect the importance of life and could easily see having a reasonable debate and even if no one budges, it wouldn't be a useless endeavor. On the political stage. Here it's pretty pointless to go into it too deep.

I understand how some can want a reasonable time frame for ending the life and I can see how some believe in the sanctity of life but no one arguing either side has ever experienced it, less the few who survive an abortion attempt.

Pointless? Perhaps, depending on what is sought. If the goal is a solution to the issue, yes, 100% futile waste of time and effort. If the goal is to explore the issue with other people then the "debate", as it were, is the point.

When a solution acceptable to the bulk of both sides isn't possible, and changing people's minds isn't in the cards, what's left but the process of discussion itself?

Oh wait, I forgot about the generations of shrill shouting past each other. Yeah, there's also that. 🥱

One of my favorite reasons for discussing abortion is that as the single most polarizing issue in our culture, it's an excellent excercise in personal restraint and respecting people with whom you passionately disagree. It's pretty awesome when an actively engaged group manages to pull it off.

I also couldn't condone abortion after 5 months because at that point it makes more sense to induce premature labor and give the kid a shot at life. The definitional distinction between a fetus and a baby is whether it's inside or outside the mother. Not very helpful. But clearly if a gestating human can breathe outside of the womb, "aborting" it would require murdering a separate, living, breathing human. Whether that life was inside the mom at that time is largely semantic.

What I'm driving at is that this issue has gone on for too long to still be talking about it in absolutes. Third trimester abortion is pretty clearly messed up. A wad of dough baked for 2/3 the time is still bread. But putting that alongside the use of Mifapristone strikes me as equally messed up. I don't know, fxck me, armchair judgements are easy and I don't even have a uterus.