Roe is next.

Amen, Peggy. It's time a monumental wrong was overturned.

If abortion is wrong for you, don't have one. But, don't legislate your religious views on the rest of the nation. This country was founded on freedom of religion, not freedom of one religion to steamroll over everyone else!!

There is no scientific basis for the point at which life begins. The Talmud, a religious work from another religion says that during childbirth, if the mother's health is in danger, first save the mother.

This says that even in a time when women were considered valued property, the life of the mother was worth more than the "life" of the unborn child, even if the unborn child is male!!

But, more importantly, this should not be an issue dominated by religion. As soon as any issue is determined to be religious in nature, as the point at which life begins so clearly is, it must be decided in favor of freedom to avoid legislating religion on the masses.

Separation of church and state must be maintained!!

This is a very private issue that must be decided on a case by case basis between a woman and her doctor. In the end, the decision must be the woman's.

Of course the decision must be the woman's. How RIDICULOUS to consider that "banning" any sort of abortion will automatically make poeple stop doing it.

No, it takes the abortions out of the competent doctors' offices and into the streets, where shady abortion clinics operate without proper training, sterilization or technique.

The proof is there, just research any country that bans abortion. Or just watch _The North and The South_ for God's sake.

The law may soon regulate males procreation rights. Required DNA records( from the time of male and female puberty ) would identify the "father" and "mother" of any fetus co-created by any male and female.. And that male and female would need to support that child financially (materially) until they were 18. Both co-creators.
If the "child" were abandoned, the male and female "parents" would be jailed. The Church/Government would then become responsible for the child's welfare.
The current law regulates and controls female bodies and female decisions about procreation. Let there be equal laws for male bodies, and male procreattion.

Since the man, father, is responsible for child support, he should have a say in an abortion. IF the women doesn't get one and the father wants one, then he is off the hook for the child support. A women controls her body and is responsible for the decision to carry the fetus to full term and there fore is responsible for raising what comes out of her.

Oh, Bob. " what comes out of her"...is all of us. Every human "comes out of her".Does a woman control her body?For how long has she really controlled her own body? For how many tens of centuries has religion and politics conformed the minds and bodies of women? And men? Does a man control his body? Do the laws control our bodies and our minds? who's power is it? Anyway, being responsible for "bringing up" a child is a little different than "raising". We usually use the word "raising" for domesticated animals other than humans. And, oh Bob, you are only "off the hook"when you no longer exert control over another persons life in any way, but bear responsibility for your own.

Bob,

In a perfect world, where the conception is between two people still in a relationship that is loving and good, the two can make the decision together. In the real world, where rapes, incest, and short term relationships make this less than practictal, this can't happen. Either way, it cannot and must not be legislated.

Bob, that's just ignorant, and would likely cause a lot of abuse of the system. "Oh, you're pregnant? God. Have an abortion. No? Fine, I'm not paying ####."

If anyone is truly desirous of avoiding paying child support (male), having an abortion (female), or otherwise being couched with the responsibility of raising a child, you must take the proper steps before you fornicate, as our dear religious brethern might coin it.