Another point which I do not understand - what the hell is the purpose of getting an abortion at this late stage of the pregnancy.
Okay, you don't want the baby. I got it. Can't you give it away for adoption? Why was it so urgent to take another person's life? What possible benefit could she have derived from this?
Indeed, that's why there really is no justification for late-term abortion. If it was a "life of the mother" issue, such as severe preclampsia, or internal bleeding, the proper medical answer would be a C-section to get the baby out anyway. In most any case you can imagine, a vaginal delivery is always more dangerous.
It is nothing but a loophole to commit infanticide.
I suppose a desperate mother who is afraid of her family or spouse finding out she's pregnant and has managed to conceal a pregnancy through the first two trimesters with loose clothing etc. might see it as a way out. No justification for killing a baby though.
I do feel that the extreme end of the pro-life side diminishes its argument by inserting itself into the very, very, early stages of conception, being concerned about the "rights" of stored embryos/blastocycsts, and opposing contraception methods that prevent implantation of fertilized eggs, well before the embryo has arms, legs, organs, or a nervous system.
Although the net result is mainly to make a nuisance of themselves.
However, the extreme end of the pro-choice side, including our current POTUS, defends infanticide. The difference is pretty clear there.
