you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]SoCo 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Roe v. Wade doesn't mean what people are being told it means. They are very mislead.

Pro-limitless-abortions people oppose RvW. It solidifies the previous case opinion that the court has a duty to not only protect the woman, but also the unborn child. Democrats frequent the position, where an unborn child warrants no protection, and is more like a cumbersome piece of life-less property that a woman can do with as she chooses. You can see how the court's duty to protect that unborn child is an obstacle.

In no way does RvW really establish the legality of abortions and it simply relies on previous cases to make its decisions (as is standard).