response 1 of 35:

Jul 4 13:23 UTC 2003

Unfortunately, if Roe vs Wade were overturned now, it would be seen as a
rejection of the right to abort.  I think the result would be the immediate
passage of laws strictly limiting, and at least a few out right banning,
abortion.  It would take several years, possibly decades, to remove those
laws.

After all, that is exactly what is happening right now: legislatures continue
to pass laws strictly limiting abortion.  The _only_ reason they don't ban
it out right is Roe vs. Wade.  It would be a very simple matter for the
legislatures to do exactly the opposite and enact laws that expanded Roe vs.
Wade, but they aren't.

response 3 of 35:

Jul 4 15:39 UTC 2003

Well said pvn. Abortion is murder ...pure and simple.
A women has her choice in the moment she chooses to spread her legs.
That's the only "woman's right to choose" that I support.
We need to enact laws that protect the rights of unborn children.

response 5 of 35:

Jul 5 08:24 UTC 2003

re#1: Isn't that exactly the rights of a State if they so choose to do?
Otherwise what use is State governments in the first place, just have
all law passed and prosecuted on a Federal level.  On the contrary, I
suspect if Roe-V-Wade were repealed the reaction of State governments
would reflect the views of their respective citizens which is what was
intended when the Constitution was enacted.  Where in your view does the
pressure to enact anti-abortion law come from?  The citizens?

re#2:  I think not.  I suspect the reaction of State's legislators would
be to individually enact either enabling legislation preserving the
status quo or to enact prohibition which would be quickly overturned.
My point is that Roe-V-Wade has purpetuated a debate that should have
been over long ago.  Nobody today seriously challenges a black person's
or a woman's right to vote.

re#3:  No. Abortion is a reasonably safe medical procedure with horrible
emotional consequences in many cases.  Fetuses don't vote and therefor
are not citizens so have no rights so abortion is not murder.

re#4: A recent study showed that the majority of women opposed abortion.
I suspect this is an artifact of the methodology or it may simply be
that women have an emotional attraction for children in general where as
men generally have a sexual attraction towards women.  What about women
who are raped?  Its a crime in the general catagory of assault and
battery so what?  What, you want rapists to pay child support?

response 7 of 35:

Jul 5 08:58 UTC 2003

Roe-V-Wade was ruled by SCOTUS at a time long ago where most States were
in the process of enacting State legislation allowing for the modern
medical procedure.  It was the '70s which was rather more than two
decades ago.  In my humble opinion it should have been over and done
with way back then.  Instead RvW has allowed the arguement to fester on
to this day.  The Roe of RvW has now come out calling for the repeal
which wouldn't even be on the radar scope had the legal process not been
subverted by that SCOTUS at the time.  The USA is a republic, not a
democracy and the fact that the majority of women might appear to hold
one view is moderated by another study which rank-orders issues shows
that abortion is rather low on the list.

response 9 of 35:

Jul 5 14:19 UTC 2003

If you're against abortion, why not make birth control free and easily 
available? Oh, but I forgot; the same people who are against abortion 
are against birth control, as well. What these people are really against 
is SEX.

response 11 of 35:

Jul 5 14:45 UTC 2003

Re #5:  Most women may say they wouldn't personally get an abortion, but
          survey results consistently show that the majority favors abortion
        remaining legal.

response 13 of 35:

Jul 5 19:12 UTC 2003

Roe vs Wade was inevitable at about the time it occurred. The issue was
on its way to the Supreme Court one way or another. The decision wasn't
inevitable, however. That it came out the way it did was, of course, a
coincidence of the issue and the evolution of the court coming together to
yield that decision. 

Speculation now on where we would be without Roe Bs Wade or an equivalent
ruling at about that time is just that: speculation. I can see several
courses history could have taken, depending on other events that have not
occurred but could have. I like to think that the tendency of our nation
has been toward increased individual freedom - but we certainly see that
that can have up and downs, with some down occurring right now. 

In any case, I laugh at those that rant that abortion is "murder",
because, course, it is. But so what? So is killing in war, or in self
defense, or in the death penalty, all forms of currently santioned murder. 
If on the other hand you want to reserve the term "murder" for illegal
killing, then abortion is by defintion not murder, as it is sanctioned. 

It is in my opinion an inalienable right that women should have, and were
denied for too long, to control their own bodies over a sufficient period
for them to make a decision about continuing a pregnancy. It is *not* as
simple as women refusing men's sexual overtures, as men have had immense
control over women in the past (and present), physically, financially and
emotionally; control that women have not had over men.

response 15 of 35:

Jul 6 08:06 UTC 2003

If Roe-v-Wade were repealed at the federal level and thrown back to the
States they would most likely pass relevent law.  The debate would be
over just as it would have been three decades or so ago if the SCOTUS
hadn't seen fit to legislate instead of act as it was originally
designed.

response 17 of 35:

Jul 6 16:26 UTC 2003

And Mensans overrunning the US would be better???

response 19 of 35:

Jul 6 20:35 UTC 2003

        What I see as happening if Roe v. Wade was overturned:  the number of
fatalities from back-alley and illegal out-of-state abortions would invariably
rise.  Women's social status would fall as fewer women are able to maintain
careers.  Single motherhood would rise.  The lives of the rich would remain
more or less the same.

response 21 of 35:

Jul 7 00:01 UTC 2003

        "Legalized suicide" doesn't have the same rhetorical bite now does it?

response 23 of 35:

Jul 7 16:43 UTC 2003

re:  "#22 (gull):  ... I have no doubts that it'd be completely 
outlawed if Roe v. Wade were overturned."

Although, if you were better informed, you might have them.