I’m as pro-life as they come, and I don’t get how being for overturning Roe v. Wade counts as “pro-choice”.
If you’re insisting that the only possible legitimate position is to be for an immediate federal banning of abortion in all 50 states, then enjoy having it be legal up until the moment of birth for the rest of your life.
The -only- way we’re ever going to get there is if it goes back to the states first by overturning Roe, then convincing enough states (two thirds) to make it illegal so that passing a constitutional amendment on the issue becomes possible.
That’s not all going to happen in 4 years. Getting Roe overturned is the next step, and if a candidate is willing to do that (as Fred is), that’s the most we can expect out of -any- candidate for the time being.
Qwinn
Unfortunately, that process will never be allowed to take place. Too many special interests will keep thier liberals in line to have an Amendment pass.
The process of overturning R v W with good judges on the SCOTUS and returning the issue to the state is the lawful and faster path to resiolution.
The proper case in front of SCOTUS to overturn RvW, stifles the issue and returns it to the state law in place BEFORE RvW was instituted. That means more babies will not be aborted.
That gives the PEOPLE the opportunity to vote on it, and the pro-life groups can garner more LOCAL control over the vote than they can in the FEDERAL system.
Any other push Federally is a waste of time. It is far easier to modify existing STATE law over a period of time than it is to make new or change any Federal law.
This simpole fundamental of State vs Federal control is lost on too many people.