Additionally, it does not address cases of rape, incest, pregnancies which have a high chance of killing the mother, or children with severe defects (who are likely to remain in foster homes, in the average-to-good case).
You can't define a clump of cells as "good," "evil," or, indeed, as "human." Your own holy book makes no attempt at doing so. If you insist on enforcing your unsupported opinion at gunpoint, it can only happen at the cost of our own free will... just as seen here.
Some will, but some won't or can't, and for many of the supporters of that law, any number >=1 is a success.
> or let the kids grow up in homes that can't support them.
The general argument at that point is that life/society is punishing the parents and family for being immoral or irresponsible, which is kept separate from the goal of saving lives/enforcing punishment by preventing abortion. In other words, the quality of those lives (or lack thereof) thereafter is seen an unrelated concern.
> What it's more likely to accomplish is to make Texas even more republican
I wouldn't say it's planned but I think Republicans are quite happy with an outcome that creates more Republicans.
What it's more likely to accomplish is to make Texas even more republican, and to make the US appear even more crazy to the outside world.