Thanks again for the sources. The problems /u/ActuallyNot addresses are the apparent biases and lack of broader assessments of the opinions discussed in those videos. Not that opinions and historical information used in those videos aren't useful or informative, but that there is balance of discussion, or careful survey of alternative information, or no peer review assessment of the source material by a broader selection of society. For example, the rights of the mother are rarely considered by some of these religious groups, and a peer discussion would help address that problem. I see that the sources for the videos are these:

https://www.liveaction.org/

http://www.maafa21.com/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_Dynamics_Inc.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCijDos-LUTh9RQvSCMQqN6Q

All of these are religious anti-abortion groups that are obviously biased, sourcing only the points of evidence that will support their causes, without a balanced assessment. That said, Maafa 21 is very interesting and and very helpful for a discussion about the background of Roe v Wade. One can however argue that - before Roe v Wade - poor and middle-class Americans were already injured and losing their lives with illegal and abusive back alley methods of abortion. I am not a Catholic, but I very much appreciate their approaches to saving lives, families &c. I also value the potential for the Church to help with today's moral problems. I would never support, however, legislation for everyone that would restrict their activities to the standards of Church dogma. Founding Fathers of the US Constitution and subsequent legal experts appreciated the problems that would arise from this kind of legislation, as they had seen these problems as the causes of European wars.