[Mrs. Don-o]

Unborn human beings were protected by law by 50 state laws in 50 states, passed by 50 state legislatures in the 100 years before before Roe vs Wade. A few states had liberalized their laws in the late 60's or early 70's-- withdrawing the protection of law from a vulnerable class --- but ALL states had some degree of protection.

This was not some church or religion imposing its distinctive faith-position on the public. This was a consensus about the duty of government to prevent the destruction of nascent human life. It was struck down not by popular demand, but by a Supreme Court which conjured a "right to abortion" out of fanciful "emanations from the penumbra" of the Constitution; even its supporters say it's an egregious instance of justices "legislating from the bench."

Protective laws benefiting our children near the beginning of their lifespan can be defended on non-creedal grounds and supported by people of any religion or no religion at all.

You might want to do a little reading on this. I recommend :

John T. Noonan, Jr. ed., The Morality of Abortion: Legal and Historical Perspectives (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1970.)

Mary Ann Glendon, Abortion and Divorce in Western Law (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1987).

[RSteyn]

>Unborn human beings were protected by law by 50 state laws in 50 states, passed by 50 state legislatures in the 100 years before before Roe vs Wade. A few states had liberalized their laws in the late 60's or early 70's-- withdrawing the protection of law from a vulnerable class --- but ALL states had some degree of protection.
This was not some church or religion imposing its distinctive faith-position on the public. This was a consensus about the duty of government to prevent the destruction of nascent human life. It was struck down not by popular demand, but by a Supreme Court which conjured a "right to abortion" out of fanciful "emanations from the penumbra" of the Constitution; even its supporters say it's an egregious instance of justices "legislating from the bench."<

And the laws prohibiting businesses from opening on Sundays that were prevalent until a few decades ago had NOTHING to do with the imposition of somebody's sabbath on everyone else, did they? It was mere chance that these prohibitions fell on Sunday...

Many states had laws in force until the 1960s prohibiting people of particular races to marry one another, too. Does the longevity of these laws and the widespread existence of these laws make them a good idea to re-apply today?