i dont understand the argument
if the mothers health is in peril, of course you can have an abortion- what are you going to do? force a women to die to keep her baby (if she doesnt want to?)
I may be as pro-life as possible but I am not going to be stupid about it
I agree with you completely.
It’s a fact that the word health has been stretched by some to mean virtually anything, but I don’t agree that this is necessarily what Romney means and I certainly don’t see any evidence of this is the article that was posted.
Agree 100%.
In fact, my only exception for abortion is when the life of the mother is endangered.
I guess you missed it when Romney said the health of the mother meant Ronald Reagan was pro-choice because the dems in California took health of the mother to mean anything and were able to increase the number of abortions exponentially. For example, morning sickness and mental stress would be reasons to kill the baby.
Romney has always been pro-abort/pro-choice and he still is, no matter what twisted grouping of words comes out of his mouth. Health of the mother has always been the democrats Trojan Horse.
Well, according to some on this thread---yes, that's exactly what you do.
Agree 1000%. I abhor abortion but in the case of rape or a womans life in danger during delivery I think it needs to be an option. My only concern is you’ll get people who will claim they need an abortion or will suffer emotional/mental trauma.
The fact is that once the standard for legal abortion is lowered to “the health of the mother” then every abortion will be legal. Some quack need only to say so and the deed is done.
Pro-life people refer to the "life" of the mother, whereby any legitimate medical procedure necessary to save the life of the mother which results in the death of the child, is not considered an "abortion."
This is the position of the Catholic Church, btw.