Considering that abortion is not listed anywhere is the Constitution, and Roe V Wade has been sent back to the States; is the issue correctly placed at the state level?

I am fine with it being this way. A State can have the electorate set the standard for that state. If CA want open and free termination of ALL fetal tissues upon request, so be it. If AL wants to set the termination of fetal tissues as illegal unless in grave danger to the mother, so be it.

My question is the following: Considering that the Left is so sure that Abortion is a winning issue for them, why would the Left not want to have this placed at the state level and have 50 different elections? After all, they are going to win every time, right?

Should the right to life of a fetus be placed at the State level or should the right to life of a fetus be at the Federal level?

I agree that it should be on the state level. Certainly sensibilities in Vermont are different than in Montana (although they are equally beautiful).

The rubber hits the road on interstate delivery of mifepristone and misoprostol which account for the majority of abortions.

Agreed. Both are beautiful and both are different.

Are you responding to what Trump suggested?

This will not satisfy anti-choice zealots. And you can't trust Trump--he just realizes that Repubs are losing bigly on this issue.

You can write in Biden's name as winning Arizona, right now...

I think the abortion right is fundamental but if there was a permanent resolution allowing states to decide the issue within certain parameters--meaning some period with legal abortion, more consideration for health of mother/extreme or fatal birth defects and some reasonable way to deal with mifepristone and misoprostol--then I could support it.

But why not make the Repubs lose big until they start getting more reasonable?

I can almost guarantee that any state that bans abortion will go downhill relative to other states as many talented people will just not live there and the social/work limitations caused by taking away the abortion right altogether (and limitations on certain forms of contraception) will make it more difficult for women to have careers and live independently...

I'm sorry, was there an answer there?

Should the State be where the right to abort is clarified legally?

As for what Trump suggested, it is what made me think. I don't care that he said it, but it is what I think. Let the states decide.

As for your verbage... It will not satisfy the anti-life zealots either. I would not limits the scope of any state's decisions. That is a more descriptive aspect of the Left.

Well, should it be at the states level? No, it shouldnt.be left to individual states.

The economic, health and social implications of taking away the abortion right are enormous for women. It's not something that should be decided politically because it does not affect half the population and yet they get an equal vote on something with profound implications. There is not a single prosperous country where abortion is completely banned (unless you count Poland as being prosperous and they are about to retreat on that)

It's definitely a moral decision but that moral decision should be made by women themselves. You can use moral suasion to convince women not to get abortions but not the power of the state (at least up until viability).

Thank you, Freeman. I knew you could give your opinion.

bbauska wrote:Thank you, Freeman. I knew you could give your opinion.

tee hee. He just needed some gentle encouragement.

One of the many services I provide.

Side note: This reminds me of the absence of RickyP. I still pray for him.