Because the thread was about having a sane conversation rather than having to agree, I want to thank those who did converse sanely and with respect for one another.
Well, it's hard to have a 'sane conversation' about elective abortions when hypocrites like you, DRC, try to justify it by any other way than 'the choice of the mother'. Claiming such irrational causes for yourself as 'compassion and caring' justifying killing the fetus--without, at any point, addressing how you would respond to anyone that might claim 'compassion and caring' as a justification to prevent killing the fetus. Ignoring every other aspect of this, no matter how realistic its premise, as being 'insane'--and, therefore, ignoring much of the reality of this situation to keep your mantra of 'compassion and caring', no matter irrational the premise, as the 'righteous excuse to kill the fetus' going--just like hypocrites tend to do....
The essential finding for me is that the law must not intrude, not that there cannot be differences of opinion or conscience.
What a hypocrite you really are, DRC. The real legal fact of this matter is that, because there are 'differences of opinion or conscience', the law has to be involved to create it as a 'right'. If you think that this should be based on 'community standards', then, don't be too surprised when those 'standards' are used, like they have been before, to make elective abortions illegal--even using the very terms you hypocritically claim for yourself--'compassion and caring'--but, this time, for the fetus--not the mother. And, the real medical fact of this matter is that there is absolutely no medical indication to abort a normal fetus like what a great, great majority of all induced abortions are. The only role that a doctor plays in this is to perform the abortion safely as has been determined to be legal. There is absolutely no 'medical' reason to abort a normal fetus--and, in fact, absent the rather unrealistic way a mother's 'suicidal ideation' has been postured with here, there is absolutely no medical reason to intentionally kill a fetus in order to save the mother's life at any stage in pregnancy. None whatsoever....
Elective abortions are not a 'medical issue'--they are a political and legal one--despite how many times DRC ignores the facts of this issue for DRC's own self-righteous posturing....
I find the politics of conscience particularly ugly,
And, DRC continues the hypocrisy in a position that claims being 'against the politics of conscience'--but, then, turns around and postures with 'compassion and caring (of course, only for the mother)' as DRC's own excuse to justify abortions...even the thought that this is a 'compassionate and caring' issue is a self-rigtheous hypocrisy that ignores the reality of abortion--which is why I described this posturing in the terms of a second-rate horror movie where everyone is standing around holding hands and singing 'Kumbaya' as the fetus about to be born is systematically killed by the 'medical authority with the right opinion' as to the 'medical indications to abort'.....that posturing is that unrealistic when it comes to the real issues--with the rights and personal responsibility this takes--involved in elective abortions....the only thing that distresses me is how much DRC is a hypocrite about it--and how much everyone else wants to 'fall in line' with that hypocrisy.....claiming all sorts of exceptions and excuses other than 'the mother wants it' as the only valid reason for elective abortions and only to be done safely by a physician if legally allowed as a right to the mother--only to be contended against the stage when the fetal has become viable and any issues any state can be compelled to act on with such fetal viability in mind--as Roe vs. Wade acknowledged all along....and, why Roe vs. Wade if there is nothing to be considered here legally?