Replies

IMHO, what we need is a better legal strategy. The pro-abortion crowd has argued the case based on privacy laws and what they 'do with their own body'.

From a scientific basis, a baby, even not born, is a unique individual with unique DNA, and thus, not just a growth on someone's body.
The legal arguments need to move this to a civil rights issue. Does a child have a civil right to live? Can one person 'own' another person's life? When does one's civil right to privacy interfere with another's civil right to live?

Although correct in it's meaning, we've been fighting this on a 'moral' ground. Morality unfortunately doesn't win court cases.

It is useless to clarify the rights of persons when SCOTUS doesn't acknowledge the personhood of the preborn. We have had a lineup of 9 wise guys who don't know what a person is. Let's see if that can improve, first.

"...IMHO, what we need is a better legal strategy. The pro-abortion crowd has argued the case based on privacy laws and what they 'do with their own body'...."

It is my opinion that the pro-abortion crowd knows that abortion is an abomination. Why else would they need so much propaganda to carry out their agenda?

I've never understood how liberal men, can so unashamedly argue the case for abortion. So called "men" such as Kerry, Schumer, Kennedy, etc. Unless of course they're renouncing responsibility for a long line of potential offspring in their past. The more likely truth is it's just another ploy to gain votes for those who have no conscience.

The reality is that law or no law, abortion is wrong and having the law on your side doesn't make it right. Courts or laws will not prevent abortions. Legal or illegal, abortions still happen. Only a change of heart can prevent them.

The unchanging fact regarding laws, is that a law does not prevent a crime, it can only point out the lawbreaker. What is legal today may be illegal tomorrow and visa versa.