Amen, to both you and the original post. Men sitting in judgement of women on reproduction is the ultimate example of oppressive patriarchy.

Where in your sick mind did you come up with that? I don't know of any woman that has carried a baby to almost term that would terminate her pregnancy unless there were very serious problems with either her or the fetus. Do you have any idea how rare a circumstance that is?
To answer your question, I would support her decision and hope that the procedure took place in a safe place to ensure the woman's health.

Any woman who terminated a pregnancy at such a late stage would almost certainly be emotionally disturbed. It’s just not something a well-balanced person would do, therefore the consequences should be some form of mental health counseling.

@glennlab morally bankrupt response to say the least. If the baby is able to live without the mother than at that point it would be wrong to terminate a pregnancy. I'm all for abortion rights but there has to be a line. Saying that you have no say over someones body "ever" is very naive.

@glennlab there are all kinds of laws that rule over someone else's body. A few that come to mind are laws against suicide and assisted suicide, laws against soldiers who purposely injure themselves to get out of duty, and obviously anti abortion laws.

@Tejas There may be laws, but as we all know by now (as agnostics, progressives and unbelievers) laws were largely made by moralistic theists, and are often unethical (if not immoral) and MUST be broken.

So, let's take a step back and ignore the laws you're referring to, and ask ourselves the simple and easy question: Whose body is it, and who has the right to intervene?

@p-nullifidian people should have 100% rights over their body as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. In a case of killing a baby that could live without the mother is murder, unless the mothers life is in jeopardy.

@Tejas No line! Never! It's a woman's choice, right up to the point the baby is born, and if she didn't want that baby in the first place, she should have the right to leave it and walk away--even suffocate it. In previous times, a rape / incest victim had that choice, and I for one find it arrogant to pontificate on the morals, when I don't have a uterus.

Soon it will be possible to preserve an embryo, and perhaps grow it outside of any womb. To draw an arbitrary date, or number of weeks, is absurd, since the condition of "viability" is constantly shifting to the left, and this advance of science is embraced by religion! If you go there (i.e., trying to determine a week, or a day, or an hour), your argument will be subject to immediate revisions and shits.

@p-nullifidian you are clearly mentally ill and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a child a pet or other people for that matter. I hope for humanity's sake you are never in a position of power over anything other than the channel on the tv.

@Tejas Nice ... declare your counterpart mentally ill without any discussion. What does one's love of animals (pets) have anything to do with a point of view on a women's right over her body?

@p-nullifidian you claimed a woman should have the right to suffocate her baby, if that doesn't scream mentally ill then idk what does.

@Tejas So let me ask you this question. If you were raped by a brother, father, uncle, or stranger and were forced by the State to carry the resulting pregnancy to term, how would you feel about delivering the result of that horror and violation against your body? How is it mentally ill to NOT want to be reminded every day of that evil, to be forced to bear the offspring from your body being violently and immorally violated? How is it mentally ill to reject the product of this "alien" assault? And how can we, as males, even comprehend this rape, this assault, this injustice?

@p-nullifidian first of all murder is worse than rape on every imaginable scale literally all of them. Once that child is born she has the right to put it up for adoption or abandon it to the state. Noone has the right to kill unless in self defense. Men are raped too, and not just by other men

@Tejas But only women are forced to become vessels of an unwanted insemination. If your brother, uncle or father impregnated you, would you be happy to bear the product of their abuse?

@p-nullifidian no of course not. But once a baby is born by no means does the mother or anyone else have the right to kill it. You sound like a warlord conquering a city and killing all the babies. You really have no argument here moral or otherwise, just admit killing born babies is wrong and go on with your day

@Tejas If you can, for a moment, put yourself in the shoes of the young woman who has been violently and forcibly impregnated. To her the spawn of that horror is alien, like a species from another planet. In a society without alternatives, infanticide is her only choice. What you appear to be asking is that she become a Mary of sorts.

@p-nullifidian and your point? Doesn't make her actions justified. Let's say someone kills my whole family, of course i want that person to pay. But if I kill that person I go to jail, as I should.

@Tejas Your example is in not comparable. My point is that no woman should ever be forced to bear a child that resulted from a nonconsensual act. And while I recognize that snuffing out the life of an infant to be an act of murder, I am also sympathetic to the pain and suffering that a daily reminder of the horror and violence of being raped could cause.

@p-nullifidian your example is pointless abortion is legal in all 50 states, the only exception is the time you have to get it before it becomes illegal. People like you are the reason conservatives push so hard against it, advocating for women to have the right to snuff a living breathing human. You should be ashamed

@Tejas Please don't confuse empathy and understanding with advocacy.

@p-nullifidian you said "she should have the right to leave it and walk away--even suffocate it" that is advocating for women to suffocate their new born.

@Tejas My mistake ... I should have qualified that with the condition that only if all other avenues were removed. Thank you for pointing out my inconsistency.