>> I object to my state spending resources to make a point based on religion and using fake science as justification
Right. All of a sudden, you're budget conscious.
It isn't fake science. Science, if anything, supports the reduction of period during which abortions should be allowed.
The USSC first made that determination in 1965. Surely, you can acknowledge that technology & medicine have advanced somewhat during that period. In 1965, 24 weeks was considered the earliest point of fetal viability, and in fact, Blackmun specifically addressed this in that determination.
Today, fetal viability begins at 20 weeks. Without any doubt at all, over time, the 20 weeks will shorten. You almost get there with your "less than 2%" figure -- but then you are faced with the challenge -- if 98% fall within the shorter, more justifiable period, why do we disregard the lives of those 2%? Particularly, when it is for a bosus issue of "women's 'reproductive health'"?
It is really time for the Left to get up to speed on science and technology. The earlier fetal sustainability occurs, the earlier the cutoff for abortions should be. We are approaching a time when abortion should be stopped altogether except in that minuscule number of cases in which it is preferred for medical reasons. |
