no birth control besides abstinence is 100% effective, and calling something that is more or less a parasite and unable to live outside its mother's womb 'life' is debatable.
but THANK YOU!!!! for being clear.
that is something parker is unable to do without 100% contradicting himself.
i should point out to parker that his statement 'if it threatens the life of the mother' is still 100% ambiguous and unclear.
suppose a doctor spotted complications with the pregnancy and diagnosed that giving birth would result in the death of the mother about 9 times out of 10. is it acceptable to abort to protect the life of the mother at that point?
now suppose the same scenario, but it would only result in the death of the mother 5 times out of 10. now is it acceptable to abort to protect the life of the mother?
now suppose the same scenario, but it would only result in the death of the mother 1 times out of 10, or even as little as 1 in 100, or even 1 in 1000. at what point is it not acceptable to abort to protect the life of the mother?
any pregnancy can result in death to the mother, sometimes with no forewarning.