No I don't get that because it is inaccurate, I lived through those years and remember well that there was little awareness of killing a person, the media talked in terms of nonviable tissue mass, growths, just tissue, the public did not see that abortion was actually killing a person, like they do today.
Presumably you know it though. I asked you "would you be against ending abortion at the federal level if we can"
I think your long, discouragingly negative lecture, showed that the answer is a clear yes, I can't see you doing anything but being against it. I don't detect social conservatism in you, which of course would explain why you fight social conservatives on thread after thread tirelessly, obsessively, endlessly.
“...there was little awareness of killing a person, the media talked in terms of nonviable tissue mass, growths, just tissue, the public did not see that abortion was actually killing a person, like they do today.”
Don’t project your own lack of understanding onto everyone else. Abortion was illegal for a reason. People were immediately mad about Roe, and it had nothing to do with suddenly realizing that babies died during abortions. Why would it have been illegal if people didn’t know what it was?
I don’t fight with social conservatives, I fight with you. It doesn’t have anything to do with social conservatism, it’s your lack of logic and incorrect factual assertions. You are not the embodiment of social conservatism. Check that ego, ansel12. I sometimes clash with (L)libertarians, too, and leftists all the time. You aren’t special, unfortunately. I actually agree with you on most of the issues, but your reasoning is just awful, your factual information is lacking, and you are a most unpleasant person as a result. The lying is the worst part. If somebody posted that reading John Wesley turned people into Zoroastrians, I would put that person in the same file as you. At least I know you probably won’t vote for a Democrat, so there’s that.