The government should have no say so over a woman’s reproductive health. That should be a decision between her, her medical professional, and her conscience/deity. A problem that arises with the language “(with exceptions)” is that there’s always exceptions to the exceptions. And certain lawmakers can’t differentiate between empirical fact, and having a strong Christian base of constituents. Living in the Bible Belt South blurs that line even more. But aside from this being a bill that is clearly catering to value voters, this bill would have us believe that women 20+ weeks pregnant are just lining up outside abortion clinics, drooling at the opportunity to terminate their pregnancy. When the fact of the matter is, most women get an abortion within the first trimester, and those who get one later, do so for medical reasons. (I.e. They _have to_ get an abortion, when they really _don’t want to_. ) I don’t know a single person who does not understand the implications of an abortion. And while you propose to end abortion, you give people no alternative. Those who would say that the number of parents on the list to adopt a baby, is as long as the number of aborted fetuses, are ignorant of the the fact that the process to adopt is even worse than the president’s proposed boarder wall. It’s expensive, and weeds out a few, but ultimately doesn’t do what you think it does. In fact, it is not uncommon for adoptees to be put into worse situations than if they had just stayed with their birth parents. It is your job to cut through the nonsense of people’s fears, and give them the facts. It is not your job to get votes based off of emotionally charged arguments, or because you know Christians will only see the word “abortion” and support this bill. The GOP loves to dangle the carrot of overturning Roe V. Wade in front of Christian Values Voters, all while making policies that trample the rights of living people. You want to protect fetuses, but when it comes to affordable healthcare for those living outside the womb, all of a sudden you turn into a bunch of socioeconomic Darwinists. You want to protect fetuses, but have no problem writing policy that enacts a long, slow, and painful death sentence on your constituents. You want to protect fetuses, because life is precious, but have no problem going to war, and taking life outside the womb. Surely life outside the womb is just as precious, even if that life is coming to take yours in the name of a different God or country. But as long as you can keep people focused on the right words, you can continue to exact your legislative death sentence on them. So either be honest, and say that this is pandering for evangelical votes, or start creating policy that actually follows your nominal faith out to its most logical conclusion. Either way, stop using catch phrases to lure Christians into your web. It’s very unbecoming of you.