What would stop everyone from going to say...California to get their abortions then? Doesn't seem like the 'states' approach would fix anything.
Travel expenses alone would make it cost prohibitive for many to have abortions elsewhere. I also suspect that insurers would cease covering abortion-related expenses except in states that mandate it. For example, if abortion was illegal in Colorado, a woman from that state would be unlikely to have the disposable funds or insurance to arrange for an abortion in California.
In a perfect world, there would be no abortion. I'll settle for the greatest reduction a.s.a.p. and work on that 100% later.
If it makes it a little bit harder for people to murder their children, it's worth it.
The thing is, it would be easier on a state by state basis to get a referendum on the ballot to overturn abortion, then it would a federal one.
Each state would be free to either accept of deny abortion, that's true.
But a referendum on the ballot would find the path of least resistance to pro-life advocates because they could use the argument that 'no federal authority' grants abortions and that the State of (so and so) has found abortions to be illegal.
My belief is the battle would be easier if Roe v Wade were overturned, and the decision left up to the states.
Nothing. No more then it did prior to Roe v. Wade. When it was legal in California and New York.
And if we outlaw it in all fifty states there is nothing that will prevent them from going to Canada or Mexico. Failing that there is nothing to prevent them from doing the home version.
All it does is say murder of the pre-born is not acceptable. The same way having laws against murder of the post born is not acceptable.
Besides Roe v. Wade is bad law based on a figment of Judiciary imagination. It should go for that reason alone.
That is the way it is suppose to be. It is up to the individual state to do the right thing. If we want it changed then it would have to be changed there too. We should not be guilty of the same federal thinking that the other side is guilty of.
The fact is that if the number of abortion providers in a state even drop, the number of abortions will drop. Mark Crutcher made a business analysis between two business.
First, is a machine repair shop. As it is something that's absolutely necessary and people have to go to it, it can afford to be somewhat inconvenient to get to.
The other is an ice cream shop which is more of a luxury and HAS to be in a convenient location for people to use it.
Abortion, Crutcher concluded was more like an ice cream shop, because if an abortion closed, people generally don't travel long distances to get one and added expense (even of the smallest sort) stops people from getting one. One abortionist complained his patient load plummetted when they raised the price $25 to cover an ultrasound.
Also, I would disagree with the person who said every state but Utah would keep abortion legal. I'd expect most of the South, parts of the midwest and Idaho to as well.
There would be nothing to stop it. There is no way to legislate morality. Before Roe, people used to go to Mexico. The thing is, it would make people stop and think a little harder, it would stop people from using abortion as a birth control devise. It would shift the national debate to a local level where it could be better addressed.