[supercat]

This is the trouble with pretending -- as do many libertarians, unfortunately -- that everything's a matter of "Privacy" or "Free Speech".

In many states, ambushing and shooting a criminal who is vandalizing your property in the night time would be considered Murder in the First Degree. In Texas, such a shooting would likely be ruled justifiable. I have never heard any argument made successfully (or even raised) that such disparity denies Texas criminals equal protection under law as compared with, e.g., Massachusetts criminals.

Since different states have very broad authority to set their own rules about when homicide is permissible, I fail to see why such authority would not extend to prenatal homicide.

[MHGinTN]

You raise a very important point, my friend. So why is Roe still in effect? The answer is the nature of the beast know euphemistically as 'activist judicial intervention'. Roe was tantamount to the SCOTUS making law, not interpreting the constitutionality of a state law. That has caused more than 40,000,000 Americans to not be a part of this society. Can we conclude that judicial activism is wrong for the Republic. You and I can, but the leftist societal engineers shrug it off as 'necessary change' from a 'living document'. They will be the ruin of this Republic if their efforts continue as the main focus of the despotic democrat party. The activist efforts by the Fla SCOTUS to control the presidential election of 2000 for their chosen goron party should tell us something dangerous is afoot in democrat methodology, but it hasn't gotten throught to most Americans yet, and probably never will. At least this is a law coming from the legislature not the activist court. New Jersey's activist court and the Toricelli/Lautenberg flaunt is another case in point of democrat methodology.