When a question of right or wrong crosses over from law of man to the moral laws or religon it becomes impossible to come to a definitive solution that can be agreed upon by all. It is important though to arrive at a solution that can be accepted from both points of view, which is never an all or nothing. The reason I say that is it is not a yes or no question. There are too many mitigating circumstances, and too many consequences to be suffered from a simple yes or no, ("all or nothing").

Abortion is just such a question. I am not going to go to law, or moral aspect to give my answer. That approch has been grossly unsuccessful and detramental to too many men and women with honest and honorable intentions in the past. Abortion is a fact of life, and at this time it is legal in AMerica. In the past it has been illegal and when there was a turn in political power the law was changed. The reason it has and has not been legal is the all or nothing syndrome.

For those who want to follow man's law, let them, and for those who wish to follow their moral or religous beliefs let them. Remember that they are directed to obey the civil laws of the government and maintain the civil rights of the individual. Since the all or nothing solution has shown itself to be unstable, logic dictates we use another criterior. Not that abortion should be or not, but what it should not be and let it define itself.

It should not be contraception or replacement for contraception. It should not be without due consideration for the health of the mother or health and quality of life for the potintial child and effect on the whole family. Consideration should also be given to couples unable to conceive children of their own.

If abortion is an option then that is all it should be. It should never be the only answer. It should be an option in the case of incest, rape, or other duly considered circumstances. Abuse of abortion rights by using it as contraception repeatedly should have dire consequences attached.

__________________
Archimedes
Because they can't wait use Rescue 8
self closing flotation rescue device.

America seems to have no center,the majority is either Liberal or Conservatives,they hate each others guts

This is a good set of comments about abortion and how it is considered. I have not really wanted to jump in on this one issue because it gets such a strong reaction dredged up.

Honestly, I think many people have not looked at Harry Blackmun's 1973 majority opinion on this; Blackmun wrote it. He was a 'conservative' judge who was appointed to the court by Richard Nixon in 1970. Imagine that, a 'constructionist' giving an opinion like this, sort of mixes up the idea of 'activist judge' (I think it makes all these terms we use a bunch of BS and there is not really black or white).

Blackmun did an imense amount of research and 'field work' on the Roe decision and became a champion for individual rights; the Roe case made an impact on his thinking (as it should have). He did recognize the rights of a woman are stake in the ruling of Roe but the door was left open for states to interpret how to handle the 2nd and 3rd tri-mesters of a pregnancy. Many people misinterpret what the decision said and think it to be carte blanche with abortion. That is not the case and what you are saying is basically what the court said.

Roe has been the law of the land for a long time and even John Roberts and Samual Alito recognized this in their confirmations. The law precedent of stare decisis, the notion that prior court decisions must be recognized as precedents, very much applies here and Roe is a difficult decision to overturn under that consideration.

Strong religious conviction are involved with this but also some very fundamental social and individual rights issues are too. The 'law of man' or the 'law of the U.S.' seem to be in conflict and give the appearance of ALL OR NOTHING but I have never agreed with that at all. I am a very big Harry Blackmun fan (tears in my eyes when he passed in 1999) and I think once he got to the Supreme Court he realized decisions were being made for EVERYONE, not just constituents where only he lived; this was now for all American citizens rich or poor. I agree with my girlfriend (who is in medicine) that there should be half women on the court to better reflect the population on context of very important social issues that have to be ruled on. I truly believe in the Constituation but no, I am not a constructionist and think Roe is one of the most important individual rights our citizens have been given in well over 200 years. My definition of where life begins is a cumulative one, it is not where the sperrn enters the egg. But, what you said about restricting abortion is very key.