I'm still against legislating any of this. It's the woman's body, not the state's. But it is interesting how it may be argued. - 1pg

---------------

That is how I feel about it. Debating the minutiae of the definition of the various stages an egg goes through after conception implies that it matters and thus concedes the argument that the dividing line between OK and NOT OK lies in these definitions. It does not.

The country had reached an uneasy, but basically stable, equilibrium under Roe and we would be better off if the Supreme Court had left it alone. But since they didn't here we are with states operating at each end of the spectrum.

If the line is drawn any later than the nanosecond of conception, then the religious zealots will still see immorality and infanticide in any voluntary termination. Since the sanctity of life is at stake, politicians so inclined like Alabama and Texas will pass excessive, burdensome and even dangerous restrictions on women in the name of God.

So despite my conservative nature, this is one thing I disagree with Trump and most Republicans about. If the republicans were to accept a moderate affirmation of a woman's right to choose, it would take away the biggest issue the Dems have over Republicans. For the republicans, a reasonable stance on abortion would go a long ways towards attracting the suburban mom demographic. It would not only be the right thing to do but it would be the smart thing to do politically.