[lelanthran]

> Indeed, access must be made easy.

That is my point. If access is not easy, selling prescription drugs to anonymous buyers is not the solution - access must be made easy.

> I’m pretty sure in fact the whole point of allowing stuff like objection of conscience is to make abortion less accessible.

I don't think so. No one, whether a doctor or not, should be forced by the state to end the life of any being. That choice must be totally theirs to make, not the states.

I do not trust any state, government or ruler with the power to compel speech or action.

[loup-vaillant]

> No one, whether a doctor or not, should be forced by the state to end the life of any being.

I feel you. But that right not to kill, conflicts with the autonomy of women. Which is more important?

> I do not trust any state, government or ruler with the power to compel speech or action.

France, and many other countries, makes it a crime (misdemeanour I think?) not to help people. If I see someone about to die, and I could prevent that, and I don’t, then I could go to jail.

This is textbook compelled action, and I fully condone it. If you don’t help someone from immediate danger you’re trash, and you should pay the consequences.

[lelanthran]

> I feel you. But that right not to kill, conflicts with the autonomy of women. Which is more important?

The right to not kill, obviously. What kind of question is this? You want to judge someone for not being (in their minds) a murderer instead of a controller-of-other-people?

> This is textbook compelled action, and I fully condone it. If you don’t help someone from immediate danger you’re trash, and you should pay the consequences.

Sure, but we aren't talking about immediate danger. All those countries you list don't compel you to help someone who is in no immediate danger.

[Fire-Dragon-DoL]

Wouldn't selling pills online effectively remove the dilemma? The doctors can avoid killing and the women are free to go through abortion

[dwaltrip]

> I do not trust any state, government or ruler with the power to compel speech or action.

This feels too broad. What modern government doesn't compel action?