Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
I'd prefer if an abortion was to be done, it be done as early as possible.
I still take issue with irresponsible men and women. If a woman can't keep her legs closed AND won't use contraceptives, she should have the kid. I'd also like to perfect a procedure that a pregnancy can switch from the mother to the father if he's found to have raped or otherwise been responsible for a pregnancy that he was planning on walking out on.
|
I have to be honest,
willravel, I'm not sure if you actually read my post. I'll quote the relevant parts again:
Quote:
- Intact dilation and extraction (also known as IDX, or sometimes just D&X) is used in approximately .17% of all abortions.
- It is probable (though definitive data do not exist) that the majority of IDX procedures are performed because of fetal abnormalities.
[...]
Because there are other surgical options for late-term abortions, it is highly unlikely that banning IDX will prevent a single abortion. It may, however, prevent some women from having the safest procedure for their particular circumstances.
|
So, not only does the procedure almost never happen (0.17% of all abortions), and have almost nothing to do with irresponsible pregnancies, banning it also does absolutely nothing to accomplish what you claim to want in your above post.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Elphaba
Secret, isn't that data from the debate that Politicophile and I had some time back?  I must have borrowed from the same source. |
Nope, the blog post I quoted was made just yesterday (April 18). The sources for the data, however, are obviously older.