I'm trying to work out how I feel about this.

Every so often, republicans in the US will accuse democrats & leftists of being "pro-abortion up to the point of birth". Sometimes they go even further and make stuff up about "post-birth abortions" (I think Trump said something about that at one point).

I always hate it when they say stuff like that because it just feels so mendacious... but honestly, I have trouble refuting it because it does seem like a fair amount of liberals & leftists are opposed to any gestational limit. (Look at the comments in this Reddit thread to get an idea of what I mean). Their reasoning seems to be that even though a qualified restriction on late-in-the-pregnancy abortions might seem like an appropriate rule to have, it's impossible to write such a law perfectly so that it would still allow abortions to be performed in every appropriate case. There would always end up being a few cases where a woman who really ought to be allowed to get an abortion would be encumbered from getting one.

I understand that argument, but... idk, I guess I just can't shake the feeling that such a law can still be implemented in a good way, and should be. The UK, the Netherlands, and Pennsylvania all have gestational limits on abortion of 24 weeks, with cases of fetal impairment, risk to the life/health of the mother, and pregnancies that resulted from r*pe excluded from the limit (as is common). I do not see the UK, the Netherlands, and Pennsylvania as particularly oppressive places for reproductive rights. As far as I know, the medical consensus is that 24 weeks is both the point when fetuses become developed enough to survive outside the womb, and also when they become developed enough to experience pain, so I do think there's some moral consideration to be given to that.

So what's the right answer here?

  • Nagarjuna [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    You should never bargain from a position of weakness. The Republicans want extreme gestational limits. So the democrats say "no gestational limits" because they don't want to legitimize their opponent's position.

    If you walk into the room saying "just a few commonsense limits" you get bargained down to extreme limits. If you start with "no limits" then you get bargained down to "just a few common sense limits."

    • FishLake@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s the right call. That’s why it’s better to shift the focus away from gestational limits and towards the privacy of patients and doctors.

    • spectre [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      The doctors can set the limits with the procedures they are comfortable performing. It doesn't make any sense to make it a legal thing.

      • Alaskaball [comrade/them]A
        ·
        1 year ago

        now this seems like a fun thing to bicker over. Why don't you make a post here on hexbear titled "What is the right stance to have regarding common sense gun laws?" and see what happens

        • SHOW_ME_YOUR_ASSHOLE@lemm.ee
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don't think anything should be labeled as common sense. The language assumes that if you agree, your opinion is the same as everyone else and must be correct. If you disagree with something labeled as common sense, you're obviously a dumb dumb and don't deserve to exist.

          • Alaskaball [comrade/them]A
            ·
            1 year ago

            Well that's why the prompt is fun. It tempts fate in igniting another inglorious hexbear struggle session.