Replies

It is that simple. When the states are returned to their constitutional powers to decide the issue, people will still have a choice. If they want an abortion, they can get one.

I don't buy the rubbish about people being too poor to get around in the lower 48. Back in my old hood, going to Chicago, Detroit or other destinations further south was common as dirt. Further, the consequences originate in choice, too - bad choices. In a free society, there are costs and in a just society the individual should bear the costs of their bad choices. Now, if you're wanting moral justice, the flashing neon reality of adoption is available for every child slaughtered and sucked down the drain. Too bad the parents (cough, cough) don't avail themselves of it.

No, over-turning R v.W is not a cop out. It is the best and most fair way to deal with what amounts to the consequences of personal stupidity and brings home the far more humane and just method of bearing the child and giving to somebody who is far more loving, capable and mature than the birth mother. Unless that is comprehended, all you're trying to do is harness the power of the state (and the wealth of morally opposed citizens) to legitimize murder and to clean up the mess of screwed up lives. That, my friend, is the ultimate cop-out.

It is not always “personal stupidity” that results in pregnancy....there is a percentage of “failed birth control” , there are rapes and incest ( none of which are “personal stupidity of the woman”).

Now what do you do-—no one deals with this issue-—with a married woman with three children who choses not to have the child and her husband agrees. They certainly won’t give the child up for adoption ( and this is NOT the exception). I may not agree with this woman’s choice. but do you prosecute her and the spouse?

and to suggest that they should just run to a state or country that has legal abortions is also hypocritical...