[free2freep]

You know as well as I that the PBA and UBVA are appetizers, and the main course is a rollback -but not necessarily a reversal- of Roe v. Wade.

However, nothing is likely to happen on Roe v. Wade in our lifetimes because we can't get a filibuster-proof majority in the senate to confirm pro-life judges, and the pusillanimous senate Republicans refuse to use the so-called nuclear option.

[Qwinn]

Actually, I personally would settle for nothing less than a full reversal. Any form of Roe v. Wade will prevent the individual States from making their own laws, and I find that totally unacceptable.

It's not that unlikely either. Remember the news that Roe v. Wade was -this- close to being overturned in the early 90's, save a last minute change of mind by Justice Kennedy. They didn't have the PBA and the UBVA to consider then. In fact, the UBVA is the more legally meaningful act of the two, because it's impossible to reconcile the concept that the child can be a victim with the concept that the child is disposable at the whim of the mother.

The pro-abortionists make fools of themselves when they screech that things like Republicans wanting a 24 hour waiting period, or parental notification, or stopping funding of overseas abortions were steps on a slippery slope to overturn Roe v. Wade. They were no such thing - those were conservative attempts to be REASONABLE and come to a compromise, and the libs just pissed them away. They would have had absolutely no legal impact on Roe v. Wade. The PBA and UBVA are different. They really ARE steps toward overturning Roe v. Wade. In fact, from the UBVA I would say it would be inevitable in anything other than an EXTREMELY partisan Court.

Qwinn