What's the rationale behind anti-abortion groups promoting the myth of reversible abortions?

So I get lying about how abortion will give you breast cancer or whatever. It’s evil, of course, but it’s consistent with discouraging abortion. But what’s the deal with all these advertisements telling women they can reverse their abortions? Wouldn’t a woman who’s on the fence be more likely to go ahead and terminate a pregnancy if she believed she could take it back?

WTF? Do you bring the aborted embryo in a Bell Jar and they reattach it?

That’s a seriously creepy claim to make, regardless of what they’ve actually got in mind.

I wonder if it’s like that shtick about “restoring your virginity” via the Lord or whatever it was …?

I’m going to really really hate myself for asking but cite? This is the first time I’ve heard of anything remotely like this.

Some googling shows that it is the idea that the effects of “abortion pills” can be reversed if given quickly enough. No needle, thread, and tiny neck-bolts involved.

A slogan from back in the day:
I wanted to be born again but Mum said no.

Sheesh. I thought you were going to refer to one I heard of once that embyos could be transplanted. I thought when I first heard it, that the idea was to get a gullible young woman to look for someone to “adopt” her embryo just long enough to get her out of the window for a legal abortion. At least, that’s what I assumed back in the 1990s, when I heard this story (that is, the story that the “antis” claimed this, not that it was true). Now as I’m typing, it’s dawning on me the whole thing could have been BS.

It couldn’t have been about the pill back then, though.


It’s so they can punish doctors who perform abortions for not doing something medically impossible, or force them to lie about it to their patients, or force them to waste their time on it.

Could it just be clickbait?

When I first saw this thread I thought it was referencing the Ohio bill that would have required doctors to re-implant ectopic pregnancies to the woman’s uterus.


I thought it was going to be like a reversible jacket, except even less fashionable.

From that linked 2019 article…

Hmm…well…wouldn’t be the first or last time; not surprising in those states, either.

I once thought of proposing a federal law that all state, federal, county, municipal, (neighborhood…whatever) laws must have scientific basis/rationale/support to even be considered. But, aside from such a law being impossible to pass due to the religious and/or mystical lobbies, the sad fact is that, ultimately, statistics and science can be misapplied or spoofed. In the end, such a law would be overdiluted to nothingness.
The end of that article says they won’t have preliminary results for at least a year. That was from February 2019; are there any results at all to report?