I appreciate where you are coming from. As recently as a couple weeks ago, that would have been my thoughts but as I mulled it over, I have come to the conclusion that because R/I constitute such a miniscule number of pregnancies, the big impact it's having on the debate could only come from the abortion lobby foisting it onto the pro life camp.If you lived in a state that currently allows abortion on demand, would you support a law that restricts abortion except in cases of rape/incest or in cases where the life of the mother was in danger? I think too many pro-lifers are in the "all-or-nothing" crowd. I would support legislation that abolishes abortions except in those cases because that would at least eliminate most abortions. After several years pass and they see that those cases are miniscule, people would be more willing to accept a law that prevents abortions even in the cases of rape/incest. It was huge mistake for states to propose such all-or-nothing laws/constitutional amendments after Roe-v-Wade was overturned. We need to take steps to get there.
If I were a member of a legislative body forming policy, I would insist that the exception clause be accompanied with the provision that a full report of a crime committed be on file with law enforcement and that a full investigation be in process as is fitting for such an allegation before the abortion is allowed to take place. Put that into place and watch the sparks fly. I'd probably insist on this in order to let the abortion lobby show their true colors.
BTW, I reside in Washington State. There's an abortion mill in Pullman. From what I've heard, business has been booming for them since Idaho banned abortions.
I live where I can stand on my porch and look across the Snake River at Idaho.
Last edited: