Why do women love abortion

>Women who have cancer are being forced to stop their chemotherapy because they can't get an abortion and the chemotherapy will either kill the fetus or cause severe birth defects.
Even bald women on cancer are getting railed by chad. It's literally fucking over AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH

Attached: 1604060972842.jpg (482x490, 40.32K)

no because then a women can get an abortion out of spite and a man who potentially wanted to be a father is both devastated and wrongfully imprisoned

In theory, they should be, but these laws are incredibly vague, meaning lawyers at hospitals have to make the call with very little case law to know. These cases aren't simple either.

When does the law cover for when the mother's life is in danger?
Is it when her life will only be in danger 5 more months into the pregnancy? Or do you have to wait? So far doctors in Missouri think they have to wait missouriindependent.com/2022/07/02/missouri-doctors-fear-vague-emergency-exception-to-abortion-ban-puts-patients-at-risk/

And where do you cut off something as life threatening? When the mother's chance of survival is only 50%? 40%? 30%?
The law does not say, and it was not made in consultation with doctors who actually have to make these decisions now and risk 15 years in prison.

these laws make no exception for rape or incest.

nbcnews.com/think/opinion/ohios-10-year-old-rape-victim-reveals-republican-abortion-law-conseque-rcna38449

I mean I really don't give a shit about abortion rights but couldn't you just have used a condom you dumb roastie?

>Because it's their bodies and they can do whatever they want with them?
This doesnt answer the question you asked yourself. You could replace abortion with literally anything and that answer would still apply, but it explains nothing
I know this is bait but fuck at least phrase your own interview better

So just correct that part and don't throw everything down?
You could use list of cases in which are considered life threatening, or give to the medic institution to decide if the pregnancy is threatening or not. You could solve it a bunch of ways instead of removing the law.
The impression I get is that people are using extreme and sad situations to justify a life of inconsequences, as most of the abortions doesn't involve things like life threatening situations, again they are quite rare.

>Have wine to celebrate your anniversary with your husband with some wine
>Miss a period and miscarry
>Go to doctor
>Get sent to jail

don't drink alcohol while you're pregnant you fucking cunt
that result is deserved for putting your child's future in jeopardy

You can't know you're pregnant until at least 4 weeks along. Quite often periods can be 2 weeks late. That's 6 weeks along.

>Have wine to celebrate your anniversary with your husband with some wine
>Drive home
>get in a car accident, blow breathalyzer with cops on scene
>Get sent to jail

Attached: 1659773466508579.jpg (564x671, 141.23K)

Fact is the only way to eliminate all these situations from happening is to leave it as a decision between a woman and her doctor, and not hold a 15 year jail sentence over their heads when they make this decision. Even in an absolute best case with a well written "life of the mother clause", that still is going to leave out so many other issues, including severe but non-life threatening complications.

For example: sometimes a woman starts giving birth before the fetus is viable. The fetus cannot survive outside the womb, and it is very dangerous for the woman to give birth, and even if it wasn't, that would be an incredibly traumatic experience to have to give birth to a fetus that will die after 5 minutes of exiting the womb. Right now, that woman will have to give birth to that fetus that cannot survive.
The easiest and simplest way to prevent these situations is not to make a million exceptions and create a massive bureaucratic oversight of women who are pregnant, but to simply go back to allowing abortions for fetuses that are not yet viable outside of the womb, at around 20-22 weeks.

Your analogy is shit.

Should have kept your pimp hand strong and not let the bitch out of sight long enough to kill the baby. And shouldn't have knocked up a bitch crazy enough to do that in the first place.

>Letting female family members out of the house without a trusted male escort
Laws do not need to make special exceptions for every instance of human carelessness. In such cases both the rapist and the harlot should be stoned to death or thrown off a building to set an example for the rest of society. The problem is that everyone has become too crass and arrogant before the law.

Attached: 0h6hbig8zb5y.jpg (370x557, 80.14K)

>not a woman
then your opinion doesn't matter on this does it retard