esmith
Veteran Member
Which are very rare and only done to protect the life of the mother.
You'd prefer the mother to die, to save the child.
I'd prefer the mother to live, so she can have more children.
Late term abortions when the pregnant person's life is at risk. Like I said: it was a massive compromise.
Keep in mind the ideal that they're backing down from:
Where do you think the happy medium should be between that an the anti-choicers' position of "no abortions anywhere at any time"?
- The right to abortion is protected at all times during pregnancy.
- Abortion services are provided free of charge to anyone who needs one.
- Medical staff whose job duties include abortion care who refuse to do their jobs can go find other work.
Nothing says that the life of the mother doesn't comes first. If that is the reason I suspect very few would have an objection. Of course there are those that would but I see no reason 60 votes in the Senate couldn't be reached if that is the only sticking point.