Nope.

I followed the case of a young mother who died from a Lysol abortion.

And I also spent a lot of time looking at the amazing images produced by 3-D sonography.

The only way through is with compassion.https://t.co/8PC3ZPjbIV

— Caitlin Flanagan (@CaitlinPacific) May 3, 2022

The question is not: "Should we allow abortions, considering how icky medical procedures can be to lay people."  Or even "...considering how much fetuses look like babies!"

The only question for government is:  should women have the choice?

This is not the same choice as:  Should I be free to kill my children?  Or abuse them?  Or beat them, starve them, torture them?  It's not the same issue as that, at all.

The only issue is:  does society have an interest in promoting the rights of the unborn over the woman carrying that child?

I defy you to find another scenario in human life where we force that burden on an individual.  The state will take my child if I can't care for it.  The state will provide care for, even bury, my family members if I refuse to take the responsibility.  The state cannot require me to perform any actions that are not contrary to law, because of the 13th Amendment.  I cannot even be required to perform the terms of a contract I have freely entered into.  I can be fined (sued, essentially) for my failure to perform; but the State cannot force me to perform (which is not even an issue of the 13th Amendment, but of very old common law to which Justice Alito is so devoted).  If I refuse to care for my family members, I will be a social pariah; but I won't be a criminal.

But if a woman chooses to have a specific medical procedure based on her own decision and determination of her needs, she may well be sent to jail, and according to Alito & Co., that's just dandy.  A far better result than leaving Roe standing as constitutional law.

Compassion is a fine and private thing.  It is not something governments are much known for, as anyone who has been to a tax office, to renew a driver's license, or to pay for a car registration in person (thank the lords and the low creatures for the internet!) can attest.  They may be efficient (or inefficient), but they don't have to be nice about it, and you can't make them be.  Compassion is certainly the best way through difficult life decisions like abortion.

But "The only way through is with compassion" has nothing to do with the law.  Politicians who pronounce grandly on the evils of abortion cry crocodile tears for the unborn.  The moment they are born, the politicians pack their tents and decamp to the next non-yet emptied womb.  Their "compassion" ends when the fetus has exited the birth canal.

As my daughter puts it, a fetus is a parasite.  It cannot survive except by living off the life of the host.  When we should protect that parasite from harm is an open and reasonable question.  After 6 or 8 weeks is extreme; up to the moment of birth is probably too extreme, too.  Somewhere in the middle balances both societal interests and individual interests.  Call that "compassion," if you will.

My compassion is for the living, here and now.  The dead don't need my tears; the unborn don't need my undue consideration.  Shall we charge women as criminals who drink and smoke during their pregnancy?  Shall we criminalize miscarriages, as a DA in south Texas tried to do recently? Where do we draw the line between abortions obtained in a clinic, and abortions induced by drugs, or by nature?  Shall we prosecute miscarriages and effectively force the woman to prove it was nature, not Big Pharma?  Do we really want to expand the "War on Drugs" that far?

Yes, I can discuss the private decision to have an abortion.  Sen. Murray on MSNBC just now said the decision is between a woman and her doctor and her religion (I think she threw in 2 other categories there, but I've lost them to short-term memory failure already).  Back when I was a practicing pastor, I could have (but never did) faced that issue with a church member.  How I would have counseled them would depend on their circumstances.  I would not say abortion is murder and a sin and God condemns it.  Neither would I say "Be free to do that you want!  No consequences!  Tra-la-la-la-la!"  I certainly wouldn't want to have to help them raise busfare to New Mexico.  Abortion is a hard enough decision without making it one you must leave the state to avoid prosecution.

Where is the compassion in criminalization? 

I haven't read the Atlantic article, but what is the point in seeking out a "third way"?  Passionate anti-abortion advocates, the kind who picket (or even bomb) abortion clinics and do all they can to get law passed outlawing abortion any way they can manage, are not interested in compromise.  I am.  Leave women to make their own choices, then counsel them (individually, not as "women") as you see fit and as they seek your counsel.  Otherwise, it's no more your business than whether or not they have plastic surgery or have a kidney stone removed.  You may not like the law allowing abortion.  I don't like the law allowing executions.  You learn to live with what you cannot control.