Life isn't a "social issue." It's a matter of existence.
Whether we protect life is the defining line between civilization and barbarism.
Finally...there’s the fact that overturning Roe has more likelihood of happening ...
I believe it is folks like Fred Thompson who are not serious about overturning Roe. If they were, they would stand for the only legitimate basis for throwing out the decision: the child's right to life. As the majority opinion in Roe admits, if the child has the right to life then the entire pro-abortion decision falls apart, and all states must respect that life per the Fourteenth Amendment.
Had we the right justices on the bench at that time, Roe would have gone the other way, and would have reinforced the constitutional requirement that all state laws respect life.
...than passing any sort of Constitutional amendment banning abortion in this current political climate.
There's no need for a constitutional amendment, so long as the unborn are recognized as already protected by the document (as defined in the Preamble). And amendment would simply clarify what is already in the document for those with reading difficulties.
But regardless of the legal method used to ban abortion, we won't get any step closer to that goal by electing spineless politicians.
We also won’t get any closer by supporting unelectable politicians.
yes, I think Fred is too close to women in his life and thereby doesn’t want to upset them by saying he would be willing to criminalize abortion. I am very dissappointed and will probably be going for Romney or Hunter.
You can, of course, believe what you want, but Fred has stated clearly, since first mentioning the idea of running for President that he wants to do exactly that.