Do I have to explain it to you AGAIN? Are you really THAT dense?
States have no authority to take away natural rights. That is something that every American can hopefully agree upon.
If Roe vs Wade were overturned, it would be a finding that there WAS no natural right to an abortion, and thus States could pass laws against it.
Where does that seem like an incompatibility other than in your inability to think clearly?
You haven't actually explained anything, YOUR statements are conflicting.
States have no authority to take away natural rights. That is something that every American can hopefully agree upon.
Yes we agree on that.
If Roe vs Wade were overturned, it would be a finding that there WAS no natural right to an abortion, and thus States could pass laws against it.
However, states would also have the option of NOT passing laws and they would thus be taking away natural rights through inaction. (This is an example of the conflicting statements that I mentioned earlier in this post.)
Where does that seem like an incompatibility other than in your inability to think clearly?
My thinking is quite clear, YOU are supporting a pro-choice by state policy.
The "let each state decide who is actually a person" policy was last tried a century and a half ago and the results were disasterous.