I am not arguing that the incrementalist policy is "so great." You and Judie Brown have the moral and legal high ground. I would argue that no abortion is justified unless literally necessary to save the mother's life when the baby can NOT be saved in any event such as a tubal pregnancy.
OTOH, can we accept ANY avoidable abortion? If I served in a legislature and the final vote of the session is about to be cast on an imperfect bill which bans only 20% OF Abortions or 80% or something short of 100% and my vote will decide passage or defeat, will you blame me for preventing the abortions that I can prevent by voting for passage? Assume that I make clear in debate that, if I vote for passage, I do not personally accept even one of the abortions I cannot prevent and I will keep coming back to ban more and more abortions until abortion is as criminal and illegal as it is immoral. I am doing what I can, all that I can, and without ever accepting abortion. Am I not abandoning to an unjust death those whom my vote COULD have saved if I hold out, refuse to enact, and wait for a possible perfect future bill? How do I justify those deaths which would be my responsibility along with that of every legislator voting NO???
All of these Utilitarian “we’re trying to save some” arguments are actually a mirage. If you have the governmental power to regulate baby butchery, you have the power to provide the equal protection that God and the Constitution explicitly and imperatively demand. You’re just fooling yourself if you think compromising the principle of equal protection is going to save anyone. No, you’re simply assuring that every weapon against the practice of human abortion has been completely disarmed.
Life and equality are intrinsically all or nothing. You’re either alive, or you’re dead. Either all are protected equally, or there is no equality.
I agree with you on a total ban with the only exception being to save the mother from death when the baby can’t be saved anyway.
Were I in a legislative body with limited power to save the unborn, I would aim to legally protect all babies possible knowing full well that either the law will end up distasteful or a court may strike it down.
The war to stop the bloodshed must be fought persistently and bravely until my last breath.
But whatever abortion continues in this fallen world I am not responsible for so long as I fight the good fight in a manner pleasing to The Lord.
As a lawyer I have to say that were I on the SCOTUS, I would be considered a radical by anyone’s standards. I’ve often thought about the blood on the hands of people like Justice Kennedy and others.
When a single person initially votes to overrule Roe, then switches in the 11th hour to hand the four pro abortion justices a majority I just can’t describe the sorrow I feel.
Millions of innocent lives in the balance, and a total failure to carry out the most basic function of government results. It is just staggering to contemplate being accountable for that.