Its because in their hearts they know that without a federal Supreme Court level decision, most states will block it, if not put a restriction on it that would require personal responsibility in the slightest.
Its like gay marriage. They know a solid if not majority of people disagree, and even more so don't like them and wouldn't give carte blanche access to it. So they need to abuse the unelected, no Pleb opinion allowed highest court to get their way.
If you go based on popularity, abortion would be legal in certain situations (rape, etc) and very early on in pregnancy (basically before anyone notices). Most people aren't absolutists, and the split the difference approach seems to be the most popular.
Compromise based on the political situation in each state would be the reasonable thing to do in a situation like this. But after having abortion on demand shoved down their throats for the past 50 years pro-lifers are in no mood to compromise and I don't blame them. Let's see how the feminists like being silenced for once.
Yeah, that's what I meant by restrictions. The problem is those situations are incredibly rare and require influences usually beyond your control, neither of which are acceptable to most pro-abortion types.
And that's assuming purely logical legislation. Whereas its quite likely to not be so, and likely a much more absolute position in law. Because that's how our retarded state governments work, and as a response to the pure absolutionist pro-abortion types.
Its because in their hearts they know that without a federal Supreme Court level decision, most states will block it, if not put a restriction on it that would require personal responsibility in the slightest.
Its like gay marriage. They know a solid if not majority of people disagree, and even more so don't like them and wouldn't give carte blanche access to it. So they need to abuse the unelected, no Pleb opinion allowed highest court to get their way.
If you go based on popularity, abortion would be legal in certain situations (rape, etc) and very early on in pregnancy (basically before anyone notices). Most people aren't absolutists, and the split the difference approach seems to be the most popular.
Compromise based on the political situation in each state would be the reasonable thing to do in a situation like this. But after having abortion on demand shoved down their throats for the past 50 years pro-lifers are in no mood to compromise and I don't blame them. Let's see how the feminists like being silenced for once.
I dont care for compromise, either. I guess I was engaging in a rare (for me) bit of realpolitik.
Yeah, that's what I meant by restrictions. The problem is those situations are incredibly rare and require influences usually beyond your control, neither of which are acceptable to most pro-abortion types.
And that's assuming purely logical legislation. Whereas its quite likely to not be so, and likely a much more absolute position in law. Because that's how our retarded state governments work, and as a response to the pure absolutionist pro-abortion types.