The person who said it would be “exactly the same” was, I believe, speaking of a SCOTUS ruling prohibiting abortion in all the states. Or a law passed by Congress that would prohibit it in all the states. In my opinion, prohibition should be reserved to the states, because it exceeds the scope of the powers of Congress.

Of course, Congress often exceeds those powers.

It would be better for these matters to be handled at the state level, like ordinary homicide codes. But, we have states doing extremes on both ends, from prohibition with limited exceptions in some states, to California, New York, and Minnesota permitting the elective killing of children up to the moment of natural birth.

The right risks over-playing it’s hand here.

They argued for decades that Roe was over-reach. A ruling the other way would be exactly the same.

You cannot beat the majority, and most Americans are pro-abortion in at least some circumstances. If the right just is happy Roe is overturned and get on with something else, rather than eternally stoking the abortion flame, they might actually start winning.

It’s still a violation of the common Christian issue with abortion as “human life at conception”, because it does not prevent the egg from being fertilized, as much as it does stop it from implanting in the womb, but this does happen naturally, regardless, so, harder to directly object to it, and it leaves it on entirely religious grounds.

Later forms of chemical abortions are different, of course, but it’s still highly questionable that it is any business of the government to set laws about it, particularly at the Federal level rather than the state level. The proper way to discourage abortions is and has long been at the individual level, using social pressure and moral and ethical challenges to encourage a desirable decision amongst the possible mothers. Forcing it upon her is just inappropriate, both as a person, a member of American society, and as a Christian.

Enforced behavior does not create a positive Christian mindset. It infantilizes the victims, and does the devil’s work, because no one appreciates being told what they can and should do on such a critical personal matter.

Short of certain immediate actions that involve harm to other human beings** or self-harm when “not in one’s proper mind”, they should be avoided like the plague.

============
** NO. Don’t even go there. The entire abortion argument, as well as the Euthanasia and Capital Punishment arguments center around legitimate disagreement over what, precisely, is “a human life”. Without a considerably greater consensus over that concept, it is not a matter of law, but a matter for social and peer pressure to deal with…

Perhaps it’ll be a moot issue soon? https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/04/deagel-population-forecast-of-nearly-70-percent-fewer-americans-by-2025-is-starting-to-look-prophetic/

That can of worms has already been opened by the FDA, states, and medical boards challenging doctors’ medical judgments about Covid treatments. Sauce for the goose and all that.

As to the original FDA approval, the evidence that it was done without proper procedures would have to be air-tight to reverse the approval.

In addition to birth control pills and modern IUDs, fitness trackers are now offering menstrual cycle tracking, which would be very useful for that method of birth control, or as an additional piece of information with the other methods. But these all require maturity and some degree of self-control, which is sadly lacking since there are such a large number of unplanned pregnancies.