do you support any abortion restrictions?

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

Of course.

[Niemeyerite]

No, I categorically reject both the idea that the "unborn" have rights and the idea that those rights would trump those of the mother even if they did exist.

As usual, Nix is right on the money.

But would you support aborting a 7-month fetus, for example?

[windjammer]

Of course. No abortion (except some exception) after the 1st semester.

[Hifly]

No, I categorically reject both the idea that the "unborn" have rights and the idea that those rights would trump those of the mother even if they did exist.

Just because the unborn are connected to the mother via the umbilical chord and placenta?
What about people on life support machines? Do they not have rights?

[MadmanMotley]

At state level yes. Allow it when the mother's life is in danger, and a few other cases.

[TNF]

No, I categorically reject both the idea that the "unborn" have rights and the idea that those rights would trump those of the mother even if they did exist.

As usual, Nix is right on the money.

But would you support aborting a 7-month fetus, for example?

If the mother wants an abortion, she should be allowed to choose one at any stage of her pregnancy.

[Simfan34]

What about a 10-month foetus?

[DC Al Fine]

What about a 10-month foetus?

Pro-labour/pro-choice is an interesting policy combination.

[H. Ross Peron]

What about a 10-month foetus?

Well if you ask Jacob Appel...

[Indy Texas]

No, I categorically reject both the idea that the "unborn" have rights and the idea that those rights would trump those of the mother even if they did exist.

As usual, Nix is right on the money.

But would you support aborting a 7-month fetus, for example?

I would not support the state interfering in the desire of a woman to do so unless there was a compelling public interest inherent in forcing her to have a child.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

Yes, some, based on things like viability and likelihood of fetal pain. I don't, on principle--although see below--support either special restrictions or special allowances based on the motivation for procuring the abortion, both because it's difficult to the point of pointlessness to really tell for sure why people do a whole host of things and because I don't think it's morally relevant anyway.

I'm familiar with the violinist thought experiment and don't find it especially convincing, in part because--and I understand that this is probably an uncommon position--I actually do think that one would have at least some kind of moral responsibility to the violinist in that case (although that responsibility may not be an overwhelming or decisive moral duty).

I'd be willing to entertain arguments on pragmatic grounds that there aren't any abortion restrictions that help more than they hurt, or that special restrictions or allowances based on motivation do help more than they hurt, since pragmatic grounds on the ones on which I support the legality of abortion in the first place.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's weird how extreme the American debate on this issue is. Rather annoyingly various activists occasionally try to import it here, where it is not welcome.

[The Dowager Mod]

What about a 10-month foetus?

Tired old strawman is tired and old....

[Nichlemn]

I certainly think it's stupid to have it just fine to abort a fetus halfway down the birth canal, but it's murder once it's out. But I think part of the solution might be weaker charges for infanticide.

[WillTheMormon]

Absolutely. Pro-life 100%.

[Marnetmar]

Restrictions, yes. Outright bans no.

[SWE]

Restrictions, yes. Outright bans no.

[Randy Bobandy]

Mmm. Not really.

[DC Al Fine]

I am an abortion restrictionist to say the least.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Yes.  I am prolife and oppose abortion except to save the mother's life.  Allowing abortion in cases of rape and incest sends the message to men that they can use women however they want sexually without consequence.  It essentially is the ultimate objectification of women. 

[Kushahontas]

None.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

Allowing abortion in cases of rape and incest sends the message to men that they can use women however they want sexually without consequence.  It essentially is the ultimate objectification of women. 

That...makes no sense at all.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I do think that there should be a time limit, but it should be as high as possible (around 30 weeks?). Other than that, no way. Also, it should be 100% covered under the public health insurance. And underage girls should be able to get an abortion without their parents being informed if they wish so.

[SWE]

Yes.  I am prolife and oppose abortion except to save the mother's life.  Allowing abortion in cases of rape and incest sends the message to men that they can use women however they want sexually without consequence.  It essentially is the ultimate objectification of women. 

...

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Yes.  I am prolife and oppose abortion except to save the mother's life.  Allowing abortion in cases of rape and incest sends the message to men that they can use women however they want sexually without consequence.  It essentially is the ultimate objectification of women. 

How is making a woman have her rapist's baby a punishment for the rapist and not the woman?