pic.twitter.com/I94i0YfZoi

— John Nugent (@Dalshime) December 3, 2021

Weird timing for a video premiere, but tune into the NFL Network tomorrow.

Anyone who has read the premise of the legal briefs for SCOTUS looking at Roe and Casey wish to express an opinion?

I’m heavily torn on this. I’m an advocate for abortion rights and agree that the 14th amendment protects the right to an abortion, but believe 40 week viable fetus abortions are horrific. The US has the most  unrestrictive  abortion laws in the world. Casey’s update to flaws identified in Roe are just as flawed today in my opinion. Viability can’t be the standard as that window is a moving target and will eventually occur immediately after conception. A 24 week old baby born without 21st century medical equipment has nearly no viability outside the womb, and it seems reasonable to assume late 21st century technology will make the viability threshold significantly lower. They’re already growing lambs in artificial wombs, so humans can’t be far off.

So with that flaw in mind, I do think a 15 week ban may be constitutional. If 90% of abortions occur before week 13, an extra 2 seems like a reasonable restriction to me. But I’ve known women who chose to abort at very late stages because some severe deformity or genetic defect was detected that would render the baby unviable after birth or the quality of life so abysmal that most people couldn’t stomach watching a child suffer that way. And I think that exception is important to protect.

Does anyone have a different perspective on Casey and where/when a viability demarcation can be moved beyond the 24 week threshold?