Since I see stats that say about that same number showing people support limitations on abortion. RvW being overturned just means it goes back to the States. Of the two sides....no abortions or abortions of viable babies...which do you think is more extreme?
~Jeordam
Roe allows for restrictions. Viability <I>is</I> a restriction.
And I have no idea why the two sides are no abortions vs abortion of no babies, but even in that framing, no abortions is obviously more extreme, if only because it makes the choice for everyone, regardless of their beliefs. Why does a non-Catholic/Christian citizen have to abide by these rules? Roe provides <I>choice</I>. It doesn't mandate abortions in any stage or any circumstance. It only allows choice. If your morality tells you this is a sin, brilliant, don't do it.
But if this belief can be enforced, why can't other beliefs be enforced? Why can't Hindus, Muslims and Jews have their beliefs codified into law that applies to everyone as well?