Iran's willingness to deal suggests that there can be a better arrangement available where they get what they want (economic gains that come with the end of sanctions) and we get what we want (Avoiding the drama of a theocracy using the threat of nuclear war as a bargaining tactic.)
The military solution would only need to be imposed if it seems likely that Iran would become a nuclear power. An Iran sensible enough that an end to sanctions is a worthwhile arrangement isn't going to play chicken.
But it means that the number of Planned Parenthood patients who get abortions from the organization is higher than three percent.
I think pro-life people see the reduction in abortions as a net gain, because many more lives will be saved.And then all those women who need them would just not have them and everything would be puppies and rainbows. It's not like they'd be forced to resort to other means that might leave them bleeding to death in some back-alley butcher shop. Of course, the "pro-life" people don't give a **** about that.
If an organization wants money from the government, that can come with conditions.
You see a pattern. I see a large sample size.
The Iran deal was opposed by every Republican in Congress (with the exception of Thomas Massie of Kansas who just voted "Present") as well as 25 House Democrats, and four Democratic Senators, including Chuck Schumer, their likely next leader.