Sometimes it does seem a small minority is deciding everything... indeed choosing a narrative and setting up talking points across all media stations to convince the masses to agree...
But on this subject of womens rights ALL womens rights in general must be decided by women. What else could be just?
The abortion subject is so tricky though because its such a case by case situation.
My sisters are both religious and one is 'prolife' and the other is 'prochoice' as far as I know these positions they have held a couple decades now. But we're all friendly, we all discuss respectfully. I guess they each had questions on their own parts about ectopic pregnancy because its something where abortion is medically necessary - the mother is at severe risk of death otherwise and the pregnancy is not viable either way. I guess there is a lot of misinformation though because apparently someone online claimed to have "started out as an ectopic pregnancy" and then, somehow, survived and is alive now. This is just not possible please ask any OBGYN.
I personally had two ectopic pregnancies and I had to end them both with an injection called methotrexate.. the second time the injection was not successful, the mass continued to grow but it was of course not a baby, it doesnt have the room to grow correctly all smashed in a fallopian tube, it was just a big jumble of cells - I saw it on the ultrasounds. So yeah I almost died that second time and the tube had burst before I had it surgically removed.
Yes so sometimes abortions are strictly necessary, and otherwise anyways would never result in a live birth - only a dead woman. As a woman who almost died in that case, how can I say for example that a woman who was raped would not end up in a depression and committing suicide if she is forced to carry a child from that - which of course again, only results in a dead woman and no live birth. So the lines of when an abortion is necessary those lines can be blurry yes I, like the I said brother IPXninja the black and white terms of thinking are too limitimg for truth to exist there.
Yes it is a subject with so many complex angles. But yeah I do think the man's viewpoint CAN be of relevance in some cases not out of a greedy man's desire to control the world through exploitation of all females, no, but a kind and loving man who wants his child and doesn't want the child to be murdered in those non necessary cases. Yeah our case was necessary and I watched my beloved mourn that loss with me. But what if it was not necesary, his mourning would have been much worse, and how could anyone blame a man who truly loves his unborn child for wanting the right to hold that child in his arms? It's not a question of asking to be led by a man - it's just the ability to empathize with the man in those situations.
It's a very, very convuluted issue, indeed. All these perspectives are valid. So who gets to decide in those cases?
Well like I said before the only way a man gets that choice (I guess the only fair way right?) is to discuss with his mate before sexual intercourse takes place and make sure if he wants a child that he only have sex with a woman who would not hurt him that way. Only - well - what if she changes her mind or what if she lied or what if he misjudged her trustworthiness... well..
So see there is no right answer in those cases...
Ultimately I have to agree with the I though, law is untrustworthy, laws change and morph and are usually designed to downpress. I don't think the legal system is how we as humans should be navigating moral issues. We need to be seeking our own spiritual answers for that, like Olivebranch said to pray and ask for guidance. And their decision is their own as well as any eternal soul consequences of their actions. If we as eternal beings have to face our own consequences, if universal law applies to us, then that law should be enough.
As my friend said to me today..."in order for laws to be necessary, a civilization has to be basically a bunch of children."