“Even if the woman were not required to take responsibility for the resulting child, she would still be burdened with the knowledge that she was a mother. This could be traumatic and damaging to her health. That’s why we must have a ‘health of the mother’ exception to any proposed limit to the right to an abortion.”
So a woman would carry the burden of knowing that she was a mother. What in the sam hill are they talking about? The mere knowledge that a woman knows she is pregnant and will be a mother is traumatic and damaging to her health? Her mental health? Her physical health? What kind of reasoning is this?
So a woman would carry the burden of knowing that she was a mother. What in the sam hill are they talking about? The mere knowledge that a woman knows she is pregnant and will be a mother is traumatic and damaging to her health? Her mental health? Her physical health? What kind of reasoning is this?
Don’t ask me. I have enough trouble following the logic of sane people sometimes. Twisted people at PP are just twisted.
Isn't it odd that the very same reason--"health of the mother"--could be used to outlaw abortion? What about the post-abortive women--more than half of them--who suffer psychologically once they realize that they are mothers? once they realize what they did to their baby? How would the good Dr Kill(emallbeforetheyre)born ease that particular burden, I wonder?
It is liberal reasoning.
Funny we all caught the last name!! I saw that as I read further, after I responded.