Hold on a sec—
I’ll move on from this topic in a minute, but there’s a lot of facets to this.
So I appreciate you’re saying that you have no issue if it saves a woman’s life. Sincerely.
I *believe* that every state with abortion restrictions has exceptions for the life of the mother—and yet, those things that I linked to still happened (and I could link to more examples).
—Because politicians are not medical professionals, and cannot realistically foresee every possible medical situation and consequence, that they should just stay out of it and leave this between a woman and her doctor?
Also, you spoke of saving the life of the woman. Let’s revisit what happened in TX.
This woman was pregnant by choice, and her life wasn’t in danger. But her fetus was nonviable, and the condition she had made it such that she may never get to have children unless physicians intervened. She said:
“I’m trying to do what is best for my baby and myself, but the state of Texas is making us both suffer. I need to end my pregnancy now so that I have the best chance for my health and a future pregnancy.”
She had to sue to make that possible, all the way to the TX Supreme Court. And when they ruled on her favor, the
TX AG intervened and personally threatened to go after any physician who performed the procedure that the Supreme Court of that state authorized. That’s pretty insane, isn’t it?
There’s nothing analogous to that which men go through, is there?