Would never happen.

And oh my blood is still boiling over the idiotic questions and comments from Alito, Thomas and the men of the court.

At the root of the anti-abortion con game is the assertion that from the instant of conception terminating a pregnancy is murder. That's a sham. A fetus is not a life that can live on its own. Same thing for assertions of fetal heartbeats and fetal brain activity.

As a man, my opinion carries little weight in the abortion issue, but personally I think a woman should have a right to abortion on simple demand up until the third trimester. Then it gets more complicated because many fetuses become viable around then and more so as the normal date for birth approaches. I think there should be gentle discouragement for discretionary third trimester abortions, but I still think it is still fundamentally a woman's right.

The best way to resolve the medical issues of providing emergency medicine to pregnant women is to leave it with the doctors and the woman, which is where it should be in the first place.

Oddly, due to the viability issue, abortion is morally a gradated right and not an absolutist right or non-right. (Practically, I think the best way is to treat it almost as a perfect absolutist right up to birth or almost birth. Exact definitions should be left to women and doctors.)

{ I rarely write about the abortion issue because I am a man, but this OP is great! }

Hi Bernardo
Thanks for your post and your support.
Re: Third trimester abortions. They are about 1% of all abortions and ONLY happen when there is a potential life-threatening condition developing for the women. Do ya think that, after carrying, in one's body, a fetus that you hope will become a healthy child, a wanted child, that a woman would willing, happily abort it. No way. A women does this when it becomes dangerous to her, or, and this is probably more important, dangerous for her child.
There are some conditions, rare conditions, that only become evident during the third trimester.
How absolutely absurd, weird, convoluted this whole discussion is.
And finally, how appalling is the ignorance, the willful ignorance of those making the rules.

I don't think any abortion is a happy event. A woman might be happy about the final result, but it is not a happy process.

I don't know the statistics, but I think your 1% figure is about right and an important point. However, it is possible that a woman might be up in the air about the decision and finally decides to abort in the third trimester. Or perhaps some event happens like a beloved supportive husband suddenly dies and thrusts the family into homelessness and abject poverty.

Regardless, the decision should be lodged with the woman and her doctors.

I deprecate the idea: I say the process of arriving at a decision to abort and having the abortion is not a happy event.

Did someone write/say that phrase without deprecating it?

Birth defects and a more basic right to end is a woman might realise late that a man is unfit. Plus all kinds of rape trafficking and tight knit cohort incest.
I'm ok w third trimester having a process to give the woman and her medical team a brief time to better evaluate whereas 1st and 2nd should be on demand.

Third trimester abortion is so rare that it's hardly worth mentioning, but . . . . .

The choice should ALWAYS be between the pregnant person and their medical team, no one else, regardless the stage of pregnancy. No limits. Otherwise it's not a choice. ("You're an autonomous being until . . . . &quot

Pregnant people simply do not go six or seven or eight months into a perfectly healthy gestation and suddenly decide enough's enough and they want to end it. If they do, they're going to have to discuss it with some medical professional at some point anyway, and if there are problems, let the medical professional(s) deal with it. Maybe it's physical health. Maybe it's mental health. Laws aren't going to address that; medical professionals are. Let it be between the parties involved, keep the damn RWNJs and their hyper-xtian religion out of any medical decisions, and stop all the arguing.

If you're going to be pro-choice, then be pro-choice. Give the pregnant person the choice without restrictions. Get yourself out of the doctor's office.

My Post must not have been clear. 1st two trimester on demand. Third medical team maybe able to do a quick review, but even then I want no legal restrictions.

Too many politicians are practicing medicine without a license, and have no real clue about women’s biology, or the actual intricacies of pregnancy. They treat women as though they were livestock. Such ignorance and disrespect!

All these Christian Fascists like to see women punished because of the fairy tale villian "Eve", who was stuck with a man too damned stupid to decide for himself what to eat.

They forget, women don’t get pregnant by themselves.

in the 3rd trimester unless it was a health or life emergency because of the viability concern. I think the cutoff was 24 weeks. I agree with that.

But prior to the 3rd trimester, it is woman's choice.

Quick. Send Bishop Sheen to counsel her.

Given where we are, it’s easy to see how the Equal Rights Amendment failed. Too many Republicans are invested in keeping women down. They are literally legislating the right to kill women for being pregnant. Never mind women don’t get pregnant by themselves. It’s beyond dystopian and barbaric.

Where did so many women-haters come from?

Honestly, I don't know a single large, established religion that treats women and men as equals.

Maybe I missed one. Let me know if I did. But really every religion I have researched puts women in a second class position in some form or another.

The large, established religions don't all believe the stupid and anti-scientific idea that an embryo or fetus is equal to the living breathing human being carrying it. If you kill her off, how do you get more children? I guess they think women are interchangeable parts and they can get a newer model. But all the major religions have other hateful ideas about women.

Some religions won't even let a man touch a woman who is having her period. How awful must that make women feel?

Anyway, most religions feel the need to subjugate women and let men treat them like crap. It's in their ancient scriptures written by men thousands of years ago.

My son's third cousin had a Bat Mitzfa and she covered contradictions between Judaism being somewhat good w women with how there are blatant discrimination too. She located a passage about purification times post birth, different time frames depending on whether the child was male or female. The "purification" was double after a girl. She tied it into some of the crazy stuff said at the Supar Court recently.

She sounds like a very smart woman.

Coney Barrett?

You have to give prior written consent for anyone to use your body parts when you die.

pardon me if this is too off-track, but I've never heard a clear explanation: why do we assume that a fetus with the IQ of a carrot = a "person"?