It is undoubtedly my lack of proficiency in posting my messages but I don’t understand why instead of posting mine they just repeat part of yours.

I will give it one final try.

So basically to you abortion is murder once “viability” is attained? If new advances in science allow the fetus to be viable before the 2nd trimester then his/its abortion is murder to you? So if you are old and feeble and have to be cared by a responsible adult because you are no longer “independent” and in practical terms “separable” from the care giver would you feel that it would not be murder to do away with you or let you die?

I tried to explain that the passage of legislation was supposed to follow ample discussions and compromises which through later revisiting would lead to laws that were accepted by the overwhelming majority of the governed. That when the courts as they have frequently done over the last 50 years short circuit this process they deny this consensus building cauldron the time to produce this natural acceptance, and instead impose the will of 9 and in many cases 5 individuals over a population where substantial pluralities do not necessarily agree with their decision. This leaves those affected negatively by the decisions with a feeling that they are disenfranchised and impotent, and thus, angry. It is not a healthy situation, and in my opinion was not one that the founders anticipated.