Protestantism

» Brian Tubbs - Response to Pink part two

Yup! And protecting human life is one of the most fundamental rules a society must concern itself with.

If pro-life people want to turn the questions into a Constitutionally righteous argument, I think they're going to have to go for an amendment to the Constitution.

The pro-life community IS pushing for such an amendment.

Other than that, the question will always be settled along the lines of Roe vs Wade as long as we remain a democracy.

Roe v. Wade is terrible constitutional jurisprudence, and even many pro-choicers admit this! The Supreme Court conceptualized the trimester system and manufactured abortion rights out of thin air! Face it. They announced new policy - and they aren't supposed to do that. That's the legislature's perogative.
Your statement about democracy is strange. A democracy reflects rule by the people - not rule by an unelected oligarchy of lifetime judges!!! The pro-choice lobbies don't want abortion policies put to democratic votes, because they KNOW that abortion will be restricted. It wouldn't be outlawed totally, BUT it would most certainly be restricted. And the pro-choice crowd knows that.

Put abortion to a vote tomorrow, Pink, and it's bye-bye to ALL third-trimester abortions and most second-trimester abortions. (Except for protecting the mother's life, of course).

Doubt me? Look at the public opinion surveys. The American people overwhelmingly support RESTRICTIONS on abortion. So, why don't we have those restrictions? The COURTS! Don't give me this democracy stuff. The pro-choice movement does NOT want democracy involved in abortion policy.