Nice strawman but it won’t work. You’re comparing apples and oranges. Yes, that was a state level decision, but at the time, slavery was legal in the United States at the time (federal level as well). Some states had decisions against slavery, some had decisions for slavery. That’s the way it’s supposed to work. States make their decisions and you live in a state that supports what you want. What you want is the federal government to TELL states what to do, which in your case is to ban abortion. But why do you want the federal government to have such power? Do you realize that if you get people in who will give you what you want, you establish a precedent, federal government as all powerful over every decision in your life. Then somewhere down the road people get elected to a majority and they don’t think like you...but guess what, they have that power that you let your friends establish. Now you have people who are opposite of you TELLING you what you can do with intimate details of your life.
I’m sorry but limited government must be for all, not just for those we don’t like. You’re no different than liberals if that’s what you want.
“You’re comparing apples and oranges”
That’s because the unborn child is just a piece of tissue and not a person - right?
“States make their decisions and you live in a state that supports what you want”
So if a state were to ban gun ownership, you would support this, since state rights trump all?
“What you want is the federal government to TELL states what to do, which in your case is to ban abortion.”
Absolutely. Just like I want the federal government to tell states that they must permit possession of firearms.
“But why do you want the federal government to have such power?”
Because the Constitution gives them this power - to protect life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. At present - liberty is being interpreted, by the federal government to protect a right to privacy (as in Griswald), and that is being extended to provide a constitutional right to abortion as found in Roe.
I am arguing that the constitution ought to protect both the born and the unborn - and that a state can no more permit abortion than it can permit the murder of any of their citizens. That is the principle that I am standing behind and I believe that the federal government does have the power to regulate.
Your argument, like Dred Scott, says that unborn children are children in one state, and across a state line, stop being children in another. This is just as untenable as arguing that a black man is not a black man depending on what state he lives in.