Of course a woman has a right to choose. It's the only way it should be. Let the woman decide for herself according to her own morals what she believes on this devisive issue. It's the only approach that makes the most sense and that's why the supreme court decided the way they did. Why should the people of a state decide to make a personal health decision for women. Why should the state be telling women what they can and can't do when it's a decision that doesn't even affect them personally and the entire nation and world have views that are all over the board. Pro-lifers don't agree on what should or shouldn't be legal, pro choicers differ widely too. Any woman who disagrees is just going to hop the state lines and go somewhere else where she can get it done. It's totally pointless and a waste of time to try to overturn Roe and get this issue back to the states. I'm sure women will be able to get abortions easier because charities will be set up all over the country with abortions and transportation and lodging fully paid for any woman that wants one, because people will feel sorry for the women having their rights taken away.
Every woman should have the right to opt out of putting their life and health at risk by continuing a pregnancy. Pregnancy is like a major surgery (probably 10 times worse and more risky) and everyone has the right to decide major health decisions like major surgery for themselves. It shouldn't be up to states to decide these issues because it places grossly unfair burdens on women. It's total inequality because women have to suffer and men don't because of burdensome, health altering and life altering laws imposed by the state.
So, if the Supreme Court decided tomorrow that it's not murder if you kill someone whose screen name begins with the letter S, you'll be OK with that?