I understand why folks want to focus on the radical position that some parties have advanced, and not the fact that the actual law in the US for the last 50 years was quite radical in the opposite direction.
You might be thinking "but this is one of those emergencies that has an exception right?" But that's not how the bans work. Even when the law allows for emergency procedures there are no doctors in the state qualified to perform them, nor any hospitals or clinics that will allow it due to the legal liabilities. Even with a fully justifiable reason the parents are forced to travel hundreds or thousands of miles on their own dime to get the necessary procedure. Even if the mother's health is on the line and she's not fit to travel you still need to get her across state lines, and if you are in the midwest or the bible belt she may just have to die, just to satisfy an overly simplistic "moral" position.
If your moral position requires you to torture newborns until they die you need to re-evaluate it.
When a baby is going to be in constant pain for its entire life due to medical complications it is really hard to justify bringing them into the world.
You're incorrectly assuming that in substance there is no difference because all late-term abortions are the result of medical emergencies or genetic defects. In Germany, which bans abortion after 12 weeks but contains exceptions for fetal and maternal health, only 3% of abortions are performed after 12 weeks:https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/nine-out-of-10-abortion.... In the US that number is more than twice as high, at 7%.
Given the 600,000 abortions in the US each year, getting our number down to the German rate would affect 24,000 abortions of fetuses that most developed countries have deemed to be worth protecting.
A very odd counter. It's worth pointing out that the GOP is beginning to follow the NRLC's playbook on this in Texas: https://www.npr.org/2022/07/15/1111383520/texas-abortion-law...