[donarb]

Of course it didn't spell out religious ideology, just as people claim the civil war wasn't about slavery. If you can cloak your argument in neutral language, it's easier to dismiss the views of the opposition and not be branded a zealot.

[yucky]

So where should the line be drawn? Should abortions at 39 weeks be legal? If not, what restrictions should be placed on them?

[donarb]

The line drawn is the government should not be involved in medical decisions between doctor and patient. Women don't endure pregnancy for almost 9 months and then decide to have an abortion a week short of birth on a whim. Late stage abortions are due to medical problems with the fetus or the health of the mother. If people are personally against abortion, don't have one, but don't force your views on others when you have no idea of the personal and painful decisions that others have to make.

[yucky]

>Late stage abortions are due to medical problems with the fetus or the health of the mother.

Then there should be no problem regulating that to ensure they are only performed that late due to those defined medical problems with the fetus, or if the life of the mother is in danger, right? I think most people would agree with that.

[donarb]

Doctors are well trained to evaluate what is needed for their patients, no need to get government involved in private personal medical procedures.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

The medical professions are already pretty well regulated in all countries. The other reply re Dr Gosnell is an obvious inflammatory distraction, and existing regulation should already apply. It does not make a logical case for new regulation, it is mere shock value and attempt to start an argument.

[yucky]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermit_Gosnell

We definitely need to regulate it.

[donarb]

Regulation is another red herring. People who are against abortion are not interested in regulating doctors, they are for 100% outright bans on any form of the procedure.