Replies

One of the impossibly grating things about some wings of the pro-life movement is its strong preference for the life of the child over the life of the mother.

That statement is absurd. Abortion to save the life of the mother was legal in all fifty states before Roe v. Wade.

Abortion to save the life of the mother was legal in all fifty states before Roe v. Wade.
***I didn’t know that. Bookmark.

592 posted on 10/20/2007 11:14:34 PM PDT by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.))

That statement is absurd. Abortion to save the life of the mother was legal in all fifty states before Roe v. Wade.

I was not referring to state law prior to Roe v. Wade, I was referring to the attitude of a significant number of people on FR, who DO NOT believe in an exemption for the life of the mother. I have had that argument here before -- I will look to see if I can find the thread in which many said "no exceptions." As a member of several pro-life organizations, I find that kind of wing-nut thinking from some on this site, or anywhere else, impossible to take and ultimately harmful to the pro-life cause.