I prefer a stricter scheme but logic isn’t going to reconcile the opposing points of view.
“Most people don’t oppose an abortion early in a pregnancy, but the opposition increases as a pregnancy advances.
That’s the way our population thinks whether you like it or not.
We don’t need a solution that satisfies one side and outrages the other because both sides think that down deep they are correct and both sides deserve some accommodation in our laws.”
First, there several fallacies in your post. But, I asked YOU to explain a logical position to what YOU posted. You reply “most people”. I think you’re wrong on that, but I’m not asking about “most people”. I’m asking YOU to help me understand why killing a child in the first trimester is any different than killing it in the third trimester. If you can’t do it, just say so. Don’t go off on a tangent about “most people” or polls or whatever. If you want to convince people of your position, defend it.
“why killing a child in the first trimester is any different than killing it in the third trimester.”
Remember, I’m looking only for a suitable laws governing the legality of abortion.
People disagree on when a fertilized egg becomes a “life”, and some pregnant women want their pregnancy ended regardless of how far along they are. They think they will be better off without the baby, and it’s their body, blah blah blah.
I have three daughters. I would argue against an abortion to them unless it threatened their health.