I have been reading all the Abortion Diaries.
We have two conflicting, no-win issues here.
If we support a woman's right to own herself, we disregard the undefined but keenly felt rights of the potential person in her womb.
If we say the life of her blastocyst, embryo, or fetus, trumps her bodily sovereignty, we relegate women to second class citizenship.
How can we distinguish ourselves from right wing extremists who really DO want to control women's bodies, without looking like baby killers?
We make the babies their problem.
If the Republicans REALLY want to save babies without forcing unwilling women to stay pregnant, they will step up and finance massive research grants to fund the development of an External Artificial Uterus.
No more arguments about when life begins, only discussions about how much they're willing to pay. The earlier the abortion, the more Artificial Gestation would cost, but that
wouldn't be our problem. It would be Operation Rescue's problem. They would have to justify why they'll pony up for an embryo but not a blastocyst.
If they waffle, we've got an Ah-HA. "See, you don't care about babies, you just want to enslave women," which is what we suspected all along.
Or, "You care more about money than Life!" which may be true, too.
I think this has the potential to make the problem quietly go away and put the Republicans in a very uncomfortable position whether the technology can actually be developed or not.