[Preechr]

Wow... I really thought I'd get fired on for that. Just one response?

Not that I don't love it when you assume I'm only talking to you, Kevvy-Wevvy. I actually went back and put "SOME OF" in that first line just so you wouldn't think I was referring to you, but that didn't work. Next time, I will try to be more explicit when painting with my wide brush.

I live in a southern state. We can't even teach kids basic math here, dude. You really think we are teaching responsible parenting? I honestly don't know where you are getting the idea that we have taken advantage of the ruling in that regard. I would be willing to bet that Planned Parenthood is MORE active in the legislatures of the states that had banned abortion before Roe, wouldn't you?

My point is, none of the states have really stepped up to the plate on the issue because it's so politically radioactive. Think about it: If you were a legislator in your state, do you think you could make any substantial headway on the handling of abortions within four years? That's all you'd have. I promise. There's just no way you'd get anything done because any measure you might propose would cause riots, whether you wanted to tighten or loosen restrictions on it. Your fellow legislators would have nothing to do with you at that point.

Oh, wait. Before you could realistically place yourself in that position, you'd have to actually move back to a real state. I forgot they allow you guys to self-govern... (haha)

And, YEAH... Of course I'm throwing the libertarian spin on anything I'd bother to discuss. I'm a libertarian! Have we met?

So it becomes hard in some states, maybe even impossible. Do you think for one minute that were Roe overturned Planned Parenthood would just give up and fade away? If Mississippi banned abortion, and Britney Spears' cousin, still living in a trailer park though everything else is just about the same as Britney herself, got knocked up and wanted an abortion, I promise you one e-mail to one of many heavily advertised groups would have a limo docking at her porch within minutes, ready to whisk her away to the next state, where abortions are still legal and grape popsicles grow from trees.

I think that takes care of worries A and B, and as for C, wouldn't that situation exist now as well as then?

I didn't get that next part about it being a right...

BUT, your next statement, about "questioning the degree to which a state really needs to entitle anybody to an abortion," is directly in line with my libertarian solution. I told you I'd convert you, buddy. Welcome to the dark side!

"I think that would be a pretty rough correlation."

I did say "Everything else being just the same," which is unrealistic and makes the question hypothetical, but I do think the differences would be trackable in a hypothetical world almost like ours. Whether or not to condone abortion is a purely moral decision, and the legislation of morality has a profound effect on the general morality of those being governed by it. I made the question hypothetical for a specific point, but I know that were Roe to go away, the lawsuits that would immediately choke the legal system of any state that tried to restrict abortion at all, as well as the political rioting that would ensue in every governing body in the country, would lock our nation down completely.

That is why we've allowed Roe to live so long after it was proven to be such bad law. The consequences of fixing it now would be deadly. The best we can hope for at this point is to learn from that mistake and try our best not to let SCOTUS put us in this kind of situation over any other issue.