re: #354 ausador

So, lets just say that Roe vs. Wade was struck down and States again had the right to restrict abortions.

What would happen as a result that would be liked by the Right?

Wouldn’t the wealthy and middle class still travel if they needed to in order to get one? Or be able to pay someone “under the table” to perform one?

So then who is it that would be having more babies? Why…uhh…gee, wouldn’t it be the poorest people who are already on the government dole for foodstamps, medicaid, and AFDC? So they want more government handouts???

They obviously have not thought this through that well… ;)

Hey, I’m still trying to figure out how allowing the government to decide that a woman must risk her life (normal childbirth is still a risk - 12.1 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2006) to carry a fetus to term is a “conservative” viewpoint.

Side note - Those maternal mortality numbers are for the United States, from a 2007 CDC report, and yes they are appalling. Canada’s rate is 8 per 100,000, while Japan manages to reduce that to 6.

On the other hand, I’ve actually bothered to read Roe v. Wade (it’s not that long and is written in plain English), and as such, realize that most of the folks (on both sides) arguing about it haven’t.

Oh, and SteelPH? Not sure if you’re calling me a RINO, but if so, I hate to disappoint you. I don’t claim to be a Republican, so I can hardly be one in name only.

Thanks for the warm welcome. It’s late and I need my beauty sleep. G’night.