UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

it factors in virtually all judgements regarding the acceptability of any abortion.

In such a case we have a completely unwanted and uninvited "intruder"...that will undoubtedly develop into a new person...introduced to a woman's uterus by a truly "Irresponsible" man. The considered opinion of the overwhelmingly large majority of Americans is that the woman in this case is totally within her rights to "Reject" the intruder, if she so chooses...and if any criminality is to be assigned, it needs to be directed toward that "Irresponsible" man who should not have created this tragic situation in the first place.

The "Innocent Intruder" you refer to repeatedly is the responsibility of the "Irresponsible" man, and not the woman...she should be free to take whatever action she deems appropriate in order to retain as much of the freedom, physical and mental health, and economic status that she had prior to this "Unwanted and Undesired" event as she can....hopefully, in this and all other instances of "Unwanted Pregnancies" the option of carrying to term will be prioritized, and abetted by substantial amounts of empathy and assistance.

Speaking of those "other" Unwanted Pregnancies, there is IMO, a significant spectrum of encounters that border on what most people consider "Rape"...be it "Incest"..."Date Rape", or "Marital Abuse"...all of which, we have come to know as being hard to judicially finalize, if you get my drift, so in effect, we need to rely on the woman's word for justification of her choice on abortion. But, it is also correct that significant numbers that occur because of mutual 'Carelessness' ...unfortunately, as I've posted before, even before Roe v. Wade, when states (e.g. Michigan) were indicting women for abortion, very few of them resulted in conviction...so the process is deeply flawed...and, btw, it is a "fact of life' that wealthy persons will avoid any such issues, while those of lesser means will end up serving as sacrificial lambs to prove the "efficacy" of those laws and prosecutions...so, again IMO, trying to adjudicate the justification for a woman's choice in ALL situations is going to be fruitless and simply best left allowing the woman to make that choice...especially in a pluralistic society like ours.

Note that Roe v. Wade has limitations, and I agree with that concept...as to what they should be (i.e. "Improvement" of RvW) is TBD.

With all this said, there is another path...education of all, young and old, about the need, and means, to be "Responsible"...education and availability fpr Contraceptives...and institutionalized programs to address women's natal and post-natal needs that lead to greater willingness to carry pregnancies to term...

btw, after reading and thinking more about the 'a priori' responsibility of men in this issue, I'm very much in favor of very aggressive programs that make it abundantly clear to that cohort that they will be held "Responsible' for any unwanted pregnancies...what those measures end up being is TBD, but they need to be "Impactful" (perhaps even a DNA registry)...I'm convinced they will make a significant difference.

I doubt that you're going to like what I've said, but try to take a few moments and ponder the concept I presented of a raped woman's inherent right to "Reject" the intrusion of an unwanted new life on her life...and the notion that it is the responsibility of the "Irresponsible Man".