Care for what? The logic is sound. It's not the responsibility of the court to make new laws. They can, but then you have an oligarchy if you allow them to keep doing it.

And they don't need to travel around the nation to recieve care. They can easily vote for whichever side they choose. The whole point is that the elected officials / the People should be deciding whether abortion is legal or illegal. There wouldn't be such a need for abortion if people were more responsible, anyway. I'm not saying don't have sex because I'd be a hypocrite. I'm saying use protection and birth control. If you can't be responsible about having sex, THEN you shouldn't be having it. I've already said I support abortion for the first trimester of the pregnancy, but Roe is out of place. My main argument is that Roe should be overturned in favour of Congress drafting the law. If the nation supports a federal grant of abortion, so be it. People would have to tolerate it, but that doesn't mean they have to accept or like the people who get abortions. Preferably, the states should decide it. Only one or two states would ban abortion (except for the 3 exceptions) anyway. If people don't like it, they can move. Otherwise, be more responsible about having sex. Most states would place some restrictions on abortion, so it wouldn't make much of a difference. No one should be aborting an 8-month pregnancy anyway. Why not just abort a 2 year-old infant?

Regardless of what happens, the oligarchs shouldn't be deciding all the laws for us.

The way you want it some states would make abortion illegal, some would keep it legal. Then all these women who need care would have to travel to another state perhaps to receive that care. It has to be one of the more silly ideas I've heard.

The whole idea is to leave decisions like gay marriage, abortion, etc to the states. You don't want a huge federal government. There already is too big of a federal government. What makes the argument silly? The people in the few states that banned it would simply need to alter their sexual behaviour a tad...so I don't see what "care" you are talking about. A woopsy? There's a reason birth control is available, and it's a hell of a lot cheaper than paying $500 for an abortion anyway. I'm pro-choice, but it's an issue better left to the states, not to the federal government. No state would ban the three exceptions, so the argument about victims and such is a moot point.

So I fail to see where my argument falls apart. All people need to do is act a tad more responsbily in regards to sex and if they live in a state where convenient abortion is illegal, it's not hard to avoid a pregnancy in the first place. Again, birth control and condoms. Condoms are what, 80-85% effective? Birth control is 90 or so. There you go. And better yet, women can opt not to have sex when they're most fertile. I blasted in my girlfriend right after her period ended, and she was fine. Not the most responsible thing to do, but that's the least likely time for a girl to get pregnant. We shouldn't be trying to save people from themselves.

It is logical, economically or socially to have some states ban abortion and some don't. What would end up happening is those in need most (ie red states) who have the most teen pregnancies would be denied care or have to travel a great distance to receive care.

Not logical.

Why would they have the most teen pregnancies? Do you mean total teen pregnancies? Many women in the red states prefer to have kids young, and why not educate them as to actually practicing safe sex to prevent the pregnancy in the first place? What makes you say the red states need abortion the most besides the number of teen pregnancies? How do you know all those girls would want abortions? It's legal as is. Many people down there don't believe in abortion anyway.

Either way, why would you expect teens to have no desire to change their sexual habits? Especially if it's illegal, and the teens are taught to be responsible about sex or wait, why would pregnancies go up? Most of the abortions are due to accidental pregnancies, the vast majority of which are due to irresponsibility on both the male and female's part. I'm still waiting to see where your argument is going...all you have said is that it's illogical for a state to hold someone responsible for their actions.

OMG that's hillarious! That was a good one... I almost thought you were serious... That's great...

I was a tiny bit serious, though. Not every pregnancy is accidental down there. They're not that all stupid hicks that watch NASCAR while banging their cousin (or sister, whichever is available).

Beause they do, and by a large majority. You see to be good because of "Christian morals" does not work. I think it is time to give honesty a try instead.

Religion has nothing to do with it. I'm saying be responsible because of what you do. If your state is actually willing to ban abortion, don't have sex unless you know what you're doing. Which is why Sex-Ed is important. Abortion isn't meant as birth-control. Do you know any women that have had 4 abortions in the last couple of years? I do. That seems like birth control to me, and that she's completely irresponsible. If you teach the kids to use condoms and birth control, then you won't have to worry about pregnancy as much. And I'm sure those percentages would change if you think of how many of those teens actually wanted kids (Even if they regret it later). Abortions legal down there, why don't they get some too? If Suzie is banging someone and she has no idea how to use birth control and Johnny doesn't wear a condom, but they're just banging because their hormones tell them to, it seems likely they'll get pregnant. I don't expect kids to abstain. I expect them to know what the hell they're doing before they have sex. Nobody just decides to have sex because they're feeling horny at that particular time. Something my girlfriend does during dinner may turn me on. Does that mean I'm going to have sex right there because I "can't control my urges"? No, of course not. People can control themselves. We aren't rabid sex-fiends (most of us, anyway).

No... Some watch it while banging their moms, or sheep...