As far as why are there any restrictions on abortions - well, that gets back to the central issue that the Roe court wrestled with.
Legally, (ignoring the competing moral and ethical issues that are wrapped up in the debate) it seems like there is a disconnect with the idea that a human being that would be viable outside of the womb (and thus having rights) but, but for the fact that it is currently in the womb, it doesn’t.
The Roe court was trying to give some level of rights to fetuses where the Constitution on its face didn’t. Viability became central to the considerations, but the court heard from experts in scientific, religious, and philosophical disciplines. Ultimately, the Roe court arrived at this great compromise based on trimesters because the result of strict interpretation leave most people feeling very dissatisfied. It was a balancing of interests - the rights of women versus the rights of something that could be a person outside of the womb that led to a result that really shouldn’t be disturbed without some Constitutional amendment.
That is an excellent summation. The key points are :
"be viable outside of the womb (and thus having rights)" which is probably one of the main points of attack (why does it's location determine whether it should have rights, viability is a constantly changing and vague descriptor).
"Viability became central to the considerations" -Medical advances make this a moving goal post.
" It was a balancing of interests - the rights of women versus the rights of something that could be a person outside of the womb" Is an abortion a woman exercising her rights to control her body or is she in fact imposing her will on another body. Does your location determine your personhood? Are the rights we enjoy given by the government or are they inalienable?
She is doing both, exercising her own rights to her body and on the body of a human that is not a congnizable person.
My niece was pregnant with twins and while still in the second trimester, 6th month, she encountered problems that threatened the lives of her babies, and her life too. It was a tough couple of weeks while the doctors ran tests, discussed possibilities...including aborting the pregnancy which would have preserved my niece's, Jessica, life. But Jessica and her husband Josh, as well as the extended family, are devoutly Christian, and while they did work with the doctors, the ultimate decision was to carry on, and if all three died, that was God's will.
Doing a C-section the twins were "born" very prematurely, like right at 6 months+. They were hardly "viable" without very intensive care in a children's hospital. Anyway, happy to report that all three, these 3 years later, are doing well. The twin girls have some catching up to do in growth, but they are in daycare and are absolutely precious!
This morning I was watching the Senate proceedings while holding my 6-month-old grandson. About a year ago, or so, my daughter could have legally murdered him. When I see this little man....a future nutso Dawg fan, BTW!...and think how easy it is to murder the ultimate in innocence...whoa!
And...this one was unplanned. My daughter was not prepared for another one....she has a daughter, now 3, already. But abortion was NEVER a consideration. The father of the baby talked about it, but my daughter would have none of it. No way! No how! no one is murdering my baby, she insisted. I think we raised her right...