fair enough, although I am still perplexed as to how a state could apply that model uniformly, which is a critical component of equal protection under the law.
Can we at once declare equal protection under the law and then leave it to the mood and whim of the mother/doctor relationship ... is that not simply what largely unbounded pro-choice already is?
It seems you are proposing a notion of structure, absent the structure part. Rhetorically pleasing, but in practice a mood-gauze of whatever the mom and the doc decide. (Which is current law in most areas, which I support).
And on 10-13 weeks ... the number of folks that are not sure they are pregnant until after that window is rather remarkable.
As one transits towards 16-18 weeks, it is a settled matter, but with irregular, young, sometimes stoned folks ... not so sure.
Yours is perfectly sensible as long as we acknowledge this, and recognize that those with private physicians will likely satisfy whether mothers health thing a person wants, and those without much less so, thus failing again equal protection under the law.
While I prefer to give the jelly rightsd, on balance, I am in the lesser of evils and permit whatever one wants to call it (murder, infanticide, whatever). Prior to viability, all rights reside with the host.
Abandoning that open a door too wide for greater evils, unequal protection, and a whirlwind of exertion of authority and property rights at a time and place where the state can only fail.
The demands and complexity of the situation exceed that which state can do. THe only likely outcome is repeated failure of state, unequal protection, and a balliwick of tort I cannot hope to describe.
| 