A House Divided on Abortion

The planet is not dying, but the GOP is and so is this issue. The last two "pro-;life Presidents put up candidates who believe Roe is settled law - as they were taught in Ivy League law schools. The theory of the case that Scalia pushed (that the states could grant personhood) has been demolished along with the protection of traditional marriage and the view that the 14th Amendment only applies to Freemen and not Latinos or women and certainly not gays.

Roe was as much about legal authority as whether first trimester embryos and fetuses are legal persons. You are on the wrong side of the legal authority argument and no, Brown offers you no hope, because it did not overturn ideas about Race - it overturned state supremacy on the issue. Brown and Roe take the same view on this. Overturning Roe would bring Plessy back!

Not being murdered depends on legal personhood, which is determined federally. It is also a right granted by legislation, not one that is protected by the Constitution, which only governs rights against the state, not its responsibilities.

I know most of the "what about the babies" crowd don't like to face the legal issues, but you must if you are telling people that they must vote pro-life to be both Catholic and in a state of grace. It is not a sin to not be ignorant of those legal niceties. It just makes your argument both foolish and fraudulent.

You should pay attention to what I am saying, since you will not only be ineffective when you do, but you will ignore what the Magisterium says about fighting abortion, which is to guarantee a living wage to families so they don't have to resort to abortion. (Yes, it really says that and in doing so condemns the fiscal insanity that is the GOP).

Switching to one of the emerging Democratic parties (the DLC or DSA factions) will make you part of the solution if you embrace what the Popes say about economic justice. Staying with the GOP assures that those who would stop abortion are a house divided.