re: #125 spudly

It’s too bad that the activists (on BOTH sides) cannot be less extreme. There is clearly a difference between early and late term abortion, for example (rationally, not from the religious POV, which tends towards absolutism).

Depends on the religion. For Catholicism life starts at conception: for Orthodox Judaism abortion is the destruction of potential life, which is a grave transgression (except to save a living person such as the mother, where it becomes mandatory) but not on the same plane as murder. ALso, the prohibition kicks in 40 days after conception, so “morning-after pills” are not considered abortions.

Some sort of middle ground policy would end some of the horrors shown in that video (I’m neither “anti-abortion” nor “entirely “pro-abortion” BTW). […]
Such a centrist position would also be supported by substantial majorities of both parties, IMO (Ie: OK early with little if any restriction, not OK late-term… the middle, then it gets ugly, probably—but no more than the battle between camps is already).

In other words: “Plan B” available OTC no questions asked (which would prevent many abortions to begin with), 1st-trimester abortions legal, 3rd-trimester illegal except when the mother’s life is in danger, 2nd trimester: some middle ground (leaving it to each state, serious medical indications only,…) This is a policy pro-lifers like myself could live with, and I think a solid majority of US citizens could live with. But grand-standers on both sides will never stand for it because it would deprive them of a politically useful hobby horse.