Replies

Sometimes it is not what you say but how you say it. Millennial's appear to be more libertarian with these types of issues and is why we are on our current path of moral relativism.

The messaging should avoid direct language with government saying no to a persons activity, if you wish to appeal to this group.

A softer message that says something like we want people to be free to make a choice but we also want the best for both the mother and the baby and that is why we respect the right to choose that protects the life of both. When the fetus can be safely removed without harm to either involved then we can proceed with the removal procedure. The baby can safely be removed at 28 weeks and with only a 2-3 month inconvenience.

If you read the abortion related law that passed in Ohio the language of up to fetal viability was inserted because they knew it had to be in to garner the votes for it to pass. And so the concern for the life of the baby is still there.

To add to that. We could say with todays modern medicine we can be both the right to choose and the right to life. In those 90 days after a women finds out she is pregnant she will have the time to decide and prepare for her choice. After that if she choose the child will be separated while preserving life and given to a new parent or guardian.

This should be the stance of federally elected officials or in states with constituents divided on this issue. In states that are solidly pro life there is no need to adjust the messaging.