I get it, abortion is also not one of your concerns or at least stopping it isn’t.
As far as remembering the abortion discussions and coverage, pre-Roe, I remember them pretty well. I don’t know whether you do or not.
People also suckered for “health of the mother” back then because of the public’s nativity and innocence.
Today, rather than a distasteful medical procedure, we know that it is killing a baby.
As on all the social conservatism, you have made your attitude perfectly clear, although you stay veiled.
You “get” very little.
Your memories are probably as sloppy as your current thinking. Though pretty young, I remember the shock that accompanied the ruling. I remember my parents being stunned. My mother explained it to me. She said it meant that a pregnant woman who didn’t want her baby could have it killed before it came out. I asked why someone would do that, and she said it was because Satan tempts people in the worst of ways. I remember the room were we sitting in, and the television was tuned to ABC. I think Harry Reasoner was the anchor, but I wouldn’t swear to it. It was quite the talk for a while.
Naivete. Nativity is something else. I’ll assume that was a typo, but I can’t be certain with you.
People always knew that. “Do not murder a child by abortion or kill a newborn infant...” That’s a couple of thousand years old. Abortion was illegal for a reason. Or are you going to now argue that is wasn’t illegal, or that people outlawed things back then for no reason? Choose.
You are not social conservatism. My attitude toward you is pretty clear. If further clarity is needed, I will provide it.