Good. It happening or not isn’t really the point. Also it’s currently illegal except to save the mother anyway.

I’ve already replied to this kind of point. We don’t make laws based around “no rational human would do this.” You’re letting your passion obscure the fact we have to restrict abuses which a small percentage of humans would commit. I would want many abortion laws removed, but no restrictions AT ALL is a fringe…

I’m not sure personally discussing what laws I would create is beneficial. I can say I would likely loosen current laws, definitely not make then stronger, from what I know of them.

Not extreme at all!

No, I do not trust the judgment of every single woman and doctor on this planet. No, I do not think “trust their judgment” is a solution to every possible regulation on anything. I think your passion for rights (understandable) is obfuscating common sense here. Again, we’re talking ANY regulation, even against insane…

“A rational person would never do X” isn’t really a reason to abolish any regulation or law on a subject though. Again, I am talking about ANY restriction, such as against insane abuses by insane people.

Haha thanks, I need to. I love coming here to challenge myself and read varying opinions but shouldn’t always stick my nose in.

Sure. Again my point is about not having ANY restrictions on abortion whatsoever. That is what I am saying is extreme. I get that many women hear “restriction” and their backs go up, but we’re talking ANY restriction at all here, even against the most insane abuses.

Are you asking me personally? My point here is about what’s extreme and bad in a general. Either way, answer is life-saving procedures always okay.

I’m a total brick wall on having NO restrictions on abortion whatsoever being an extreme position and bad in a general election. You’re absolutely right. I feel no shame about that, sorry.

I am talking about a stance against ANY restrictions on abortion at all. I’m not talking about the 20 week ban. Just disagree with me and move on pls.

None of that matters to what I’m saying. I am of course for life-saving procedures. The comment was about NO restrictions AT ALL on abortion, ever. That would be an extreme position.

Well polls wise and general election wise it is an extreme position. I’m not trying to upset anyone by saying that, it just is. You disagree and I am sure many on this site do, but I still hope he doesn’t talk about it in a general.

Jezebel isn’t a place to discuss restrictions on abortion. I know what the polling is, I know where the country is. I hope Sanders doesn’t start talking about unrestricted late term abortions because it’s a bad numbers game, and that’s all I said.

Your polls were about the new 20 week idea. Mine are about restrictions period. Here is the link you require to the one I read last:

Never said weird, said extreme. The vast majority disagree and its not a good general election statement on that basis even if you agree.

I’m not talking about life-saving procedures at all and not sure why you jumped to that.

You can Google, that’s what did. The window still open is a Marist poll that states 84%. They vary within that range. Heck even the 20 week ban has a majority support even reported on Huffington Post.

Well I agree with that. Premature babies have survived as young as 21 weeks though so we’re treading on dangerous ground there.

Look, this is a bad place for this debate and your writing makes it clear there’s no middle-ground here, so agree to disagree.