" Mr Blair, how many times have the Republicans tried to have Roe v Wade overturned? They talk the talk but don't walk the walk. You've been duped Mr. Blair. The only time Repubicans talk about abortion is during elections. After that, nothing. Get it yet? "

" What then does Vicky M. Tucker and what does the Democrat Party honestly have to fear of a spirited conversation among the states...."

Again, Roe v. Wade being overturned is an unlikely scenario. But what if it were, and the abortion decision went back to the states? According to a study by the pro-life group Catholics United, there are only 16 states where over 45% of the adult population identifies itself as "pro-life." Banning abortions in these 16 states would affect only 10% of all abortion decisions in the U.S. Actually, the effect would be less than that, since women living in states where abortion is banned could travel elsewhere.

Looking at this situation under an UNLIKELY best-case scenario, if the 25 most pro-life states enact abortion bans, the study finds, overturning Roe v. Wade would affect less than 37% of all abortion decisions, leaving 63% unaffected.

This study confirms what many have suspected for some time: that pursuing legal restrictions on abortion services is a generally ineffective strategy of addressing abortion in the United States, said Dr. Joe Wright, assistant professor of political science at Penn State University and Visiting Fellow at the University of Notre Dame, and author of the study. Successfully combating the practice of abortion requires policies which speak to the reasons most women choose abortions in the first place: economic insecurity, lack of health care, and absence of other essential family supports.

If I fear anything, it is that additional decades (and lives) are going to be wasted. Think of all the time, energy, and money that have been spent by the pro-life side in pursuit of the Holy Grail of an abortion ban. How many lives have been saved by this political pursuit?

The Democratic Party is increasingly embracing common ground efforts to address abortion. Unfortunately, the Republican Party continues to exploit this issue and encourage the polarization that so far has hindered true progress.

Pro-life Democrats in Congress support a proposal that has the potential of reducing the abortion rate by 95% within the next 10 years. The 95/10 plan is a comprehensive legislative package which, according to its proponents, would ban discriminatory insurance industry practices against pregnant women; make the adoption tax credits permanent; fully fund the WIC program; expand funding of domestic violence programs; establish pregnancy prevention programs and require that insurers cover contraceptives. It is a proposal that should receive wide public support from both pro-life and pro-choice advocates.

When people decide to drop the rhetoric and stop regarding an abortion ban as the Holy Grail, and if they are willing to put their money where their mouths are, so to speak, maybe something truly will be done to stop abortion in this country. "

" every 4 years...the same old tiring propaganda from the republicans reagrding abortion and gay rights. "

" Republicans had COMPLETE control of congress and the white house, they even had control of the courts - yet they didn't do ONE THING to stop abortion or gun laws.

Going to the States for this NATIONAL issue is simply STUPID. It's not a STATE issue. Our whole country is involved in this issue, not just Illinois or Indiana, etc...

If one State allows it and another doesn't, it would just mean the mother would cross state lines. No fix there.

Having a discussion and more education is the reason for abortions dropping. Seeing the child at different stages in the womb helps a great deal.

I'd much rather insist all kids be forced to see what the baby looks like at these stages and hoping that influences their decision.

There is nothing wrong with EDUCATION. Forcing one's moral VIEWS on others is wrong. "

" Moral issues being decided by the states, is usually a bad idea. Socializing reproductive decisions, tends to be frowned on by developed nations. We still have this small conservative based lot that don't get what it is they are even trying to do. Spend this much energy on anything productive to reducing abortions. No they want it to be law, but not to have to deal with any of the other issues in the abortion discussion.

No one is pro abortion. The folks accused of socialism on everything else, wants the government to not control reproductive issues. The staunch supporters of hands off and smaller government, wants the government to legislate the womb.

They want conception to be legaly the beginning of recognized citizenship, but not be responsible for any of the programs pregnant mothers, orphaned children, abandoned children, etc need to survive and thrive. Any pregnancy not carried to a live delivery is an abortion in the calculations, and by definition. Miscarriages, and other pregnancy issues which are often part of the natural course of things, fall into this definition.

This bunch typicly opposes birth control, education, and expecting mother care groups. They just want to legislate the womb, and leave the aftermath, to people to pick up the pieces by them selves. If they spent their time efforts and money, on solving issues children, mothers, and families face, in the thirty plus years since roe v, wade, abortions would continually be lower, and resources for children, mothers, and families would be at an all time high.

Orphanages, group homes, and child care resources have gone by the way side. If every conception resuled in a baby, where would they go, what kind of lives and loving environments, can they expect, fill that void, and the choices increase. This group has fought to reduce choices, leaving abortion, as a more prominent one.

Abortion figures have dropped significantly. In the studies I saw recently. Economic crisis, tends to make these numbers more likely to rise. Reality of alternative resources being limited, does as well. Pro life, only has issue with one decision. It has done little to expand choises to reduce dependance of reverting to that decision. They just want to legislate the womb, and leave the consequences for every one else to figure out how to respond to. Kind of selfish if you ask me. Kids need love and resources to thrive. I don't advocate abortion, I believe it is a womans decision to make. If alternatives were increased, it would be a much less often turned to decision.

Look up the two cases roe v. wade was decided on. It might surprize you what actually transpired. "

" Well said, VTucker. I am an abortion hater. I have said this often. But overturning the laws protecting the woman's right to choose will not work to end this practice. The only way to end abortion is to end unwanted pregnancies to begin with. And that will take better education, easily available contraceptives to any who ask, and better support for those who find themselves pregnant anyway.

It is very easy to take the high road of superior moral attitude then point a finger and say too bad, so sad. That's been going on for generation after generation, and quess what. Abortions are still being performed. Overthrow RoeV Wade, and abortions will continue. Stop the nonsense and get behind something that might actually work. "

" Morality aside, no one ever brings up the fact that Roe vs. Wade was an illegal example of the Supreme Court legislating. The 14th amendment was written to guarantee rights to recently freed slaves and not for abortions. "

" Abortion not the only moral issue. Where they get the stem cells for stem cell research probly a bigger issue right now. Replay Barracks 2004 DNC speach, I find it insulting that americans would use a human fetus for research. Also, women have the right to chose, killing a child should not be the choice. "

" Republicans will never repeal R vs. W. If abortion was off the table they would lose 25 to 50 percent of their "one issue" constituency.
Take guns off the table and there goes another 25 to 50.
That leaves just those who are motivated by greed. "

" I totally agree with coonbug! I do not agree with abortion but to each his own. I also would not force my opinion on anyone. I think there should be tougher laws regarding abortion. I know people who get abortions like birth control and that is where the line needs to be drawn!

Partial-birth abortion is wrong, period! That child is alive! I think that abortion is a moral issue and lets face it a lot of people do not have morals. "

" Being Me wrote on Oct 21, 2008 8:25 AM:
I know people who get abortions like birth control and that is where the line needs to be drawn! """"

i seriously doubt you know anyone who uses abortion like birth control. if you do, they must be millionaires....and i would think any good millionaire could afford contraceptives.

in other words....quit repeating the crap you hear, and use your brain....if you have one. "

" it's a womans body, she should have the right to decide what she does with it, hopefully she chooses to use common sense or the crazy number of contaceptives to prevent an abortion from ever having to take place, it isn't that hard to "not" get pregnant "

" Excellent points, nj.

I think comments made regarding abortion have a lot more credibility if they come from a woman. Obviously there are some who disagree with this. As a man I will never have to make such a difficult decision, and I think it's all too easy to tell others what they should do with their bodies.

Anecdotal comments made about situations where people using abortion as birth control are obviously so minuscule that they really don't deserve any place in the discussion. "

" First of all Father Dumb! How are you going to tell me what I know?! I can't repeat stuff I heard if I stated I know! You should learn to read! I bet you are dumb enough to tell me that I don't know anyone who has!

You should really learn how to address people because I wouldn't be calling you dumb if you had not attack me! Tell me what brain do you have because I can't tell from your post! "

" I have a problem with the government intervening in people's lives. I also have a problem when abortion is considered legally acceptable and when it is not.

The Court (Roe v Wade)held that, though the state had an interest in protecting fetal life, this interest did not become "compelling" (i.e. adequate to allow banning an abortion) until fetal viability occurred in the third trimester of pregnancy. Thus, all the state abortion laws that regulated abortion during the first six months of pregnancy (except for the purpose of protecting maternal health during the second trimester) were invalidated.

So, it comes down to abortion can be ok one day and wrong (taking a life) the next. When dealing with taking a life that seems very arbitrary. Roe v Wade seems to say that it is ok within the first 6 months but 6 months and a day is not ok. (Maybe, I am missing something there?) That seems pretty late in a pregnancy but, no matter what time limit is imposed, it would be ok one day and not the next? "

" being me wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:48 PM:
" First of all Father Dumb! How are you going to tell me what I know?! I can't repeat stuff I heard if I stated I know!""""

thanks for making my point! "

" being me wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:48 PM:

" First of all Father Dumb! How are you going to tell me what I know?! I can't repeat stuff I heard if I stated I know! You should learn to read! I bet you are dumb enough to tell me that I don't know anyone who has!

You should really learn how to address people because I wouldn't be calling you dumb if you had not attack me! Tell me what brain do you have because I can't tell from your post! "

------------------------

This should make all the area English teachers proud.LOL! "

" speaking of homosexuality/lesbianism, i see caribou barbie is supporting california's prop 8 proposal. "

" thanks Harry, I am a guy though so I hope my opinion is still counted lol, I just think laziness attributes to these kinds of arguments, it "is" too easy to "not" get pregnant "

" extortion:

Leaders of the campaign to outlaw same-sex marriage in California are warning businesses that have given money to the states largest gay rights group they will be publicly identified as opponents of traditional unions unless they contribute to the gay marriage ban, too.

ProtectMarriage.com, the umbrella group behind a ballot initiative that would overturn the California Supreme Court decision that legalized gay marriage, sent a certified letter this week asking companies to withdraw their support of Equality California, a nonprofit organization that is helping lead the campaign against Proposition 8.

Make a donation of a like amount to ProtectMarriage.com which will help us correct this error, reads the letter. Were you to elect not to donate comparably, it would be a clear indication that you are in opposition to traditional marriage. The names of any companies and organizations that choose not to donate in like manner to ProtectMarriage.com but have given to Equality California will be published.

The letter was signed by four members of the groups executive committee: campaign chairman Ron Prentice; Edward Dolejsi, executive director of the California Catholic Conference; Mark Jansson, a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; and Andrew Pugno, the lawyer for ProtectMarriage.com. A donation form was attached. The letter did not say where the names would be published. "