Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] what majority wants Bush?

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:

> By declaring abortion as a constitutionally protected activity, one is 
> effectively ostrocising all pro-lifers from involvement in any kind of 
> genuine legal debate.  Anyone who truly believes in choice should still 
> be opposed to Roe versus Wade, even if they agree with allowing 
> abortions.  It should not be a constitutional issue unless an 
> appropriate constitutional ammendment can be passed.


I don't agree that Roe v. Wade is ostracizing anyone.  It just limits the 
authority of states to control women's reproductive choices.

How would you like to live in a country where, in some states, abortion 
was perfectly legal and acceptable, maybe even paid for by the state, 
while in other states, abortion was considered homicide, the most serious 
crime, with the death penalty a possible punishment.  Without Roe v. Wade 
imposing uniformity on state laws, I think the country I just described 
was a real possibility for us.

Mike
_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion