I concur. You must word this position more artfully if you are a politician- even in rural Missouri.
Abortion is wrong. Some draw a finer line at saving the life of the mother...what do you say then, FRiend?
“Abortion is wrong. Some draw a finer line at saving the life of the mother...what do you say then, FRiend?”
That is a horrible situation to be put in. It is similar to separating conjoined twins where they must be separated for either one of them to survive. My take on this:
- this is a treatment where the INTENT is to save a life, not kill a life. Abortion’s intent is to kill a life, in order to make life less inconvenient for a woman.
- a treatment needs to happen, regardless of the outcome of the treatment, because only the act of treatment can save any life. If no treatment, no life, since both mother and child die.
- every treatment is unique, but in the treatment, perhaps the baby could be extracted safely. If not possible, the mother needs to be separated from the child for any possibility of her surviving.
- all treatments have risk. Death during separation is the risk due to limits in technology. In the olden days, both mother and child would die anyway. In the future, nobody dies!
Basically, I do NOT see the act of saving life as abortion. Am I wrong? Does it matter?
That's where Akin drew the line. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M09iWwKiDsA
He was clearly uncomfortable answering the rape / abortion question, knowing his answer does not poll well. That's probably what led him to adduce the questionable medical research about probability of conception when the act is forced. I.e., Yeah, I'm against abortion in rape cases, but, really, the question hardly ever comes up in real life — the docs say so ... yadda, yadda. Oops! Scheißsturm incoming!