[counterpunch]

This quote says it all - "I don't see how you can be antiabortion, be in favor of a constitutional amendment and be in favor of states' rights."

Then you don't have a very good understanding of our constitutional process.
A person can be personally against abortion, but also believe that the constitution should be the final arbiter, not their own personal opinion.
Wow! Just imagine An America with more people like that!

Now as a person well informed about constitutional principles, this individual would understand that Roe v. Wade is a constitutional travesty, and the proper place for deciding abortion law, according to the Constitution in its current form, would be at the state level.

But this personal also would understand that the amendment process allows the constitution to say anything We The People want it to say, and this person may like to see a ban on abortion included in the Constitution. All of this would perfectly follow the disciplined constitutionalist philosophy properly.

 

[aMorePerfectUnion]

counterpunch,

It just seems to me that a Constitutional Amendment and
turning the issue back for each state to decide on its own
are mutually exclusive.

Would you explain the purpose of the Amendment option,
if you favor it going back to be decided state by state?

thanks,
ampu