| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
The few of us here...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Fine. But what about the women who, in the absence of any underlying health risk to her or the infant, insist upon having the right to an abortion at *any* stage in the pregnancy? Is forcing her to have the baby after the first trimester done "just to teach her a lesson"? Or is it to protect the life of the baby? I thought my statement was clear. It is anything *but* clear. Simple question: *Why* do *you* oppose abortion after the first trimester? I don't. In the absence of any underlying health risk to the mother or infant, why do you oppose abortion after the first trimester? It isn't an issue of concern. Very, very few abortions are performed after the first trimester except for medical reasons. According to the CDC (1997 statistics), 14% of abortions occur after the first 13 weeks. That's a little over 166,000 abortions. You're probably the only person on Earth who thinks 166,000 lives is "very, very few". They're not lives. -- Email sent to is never read. |
Threaded Mode
