Unlikely comment? This appears on the Dean for DNC Chair/Blog for America site:

fred, are you okay with Rowe V Wade as it stands?
Posted by puddleriver*in*WV at January 30, 2005 07:43 PM
————-
I believe it was a bad move. I would much rather have seen abortion dealt with State-by-State and/or through Congress even if it took an amendment. In other words, there was a debate and legislative/democratic/ballot box process missing and that’s why the issue won’t go away.
Put the shoe on the other foot. Would you like nine men deciding that abortion should be banned?
To answer your question. I have no great love for Roe v. Wade. Doing away with it would not make abortion illegal in the States that have decided it to be legal.
According to NARAL that means today it might be banned in about nine (probably red) States. I wonder how many of the women seeking abortion in those States have to travel to get one anyway?
People should vote on laws not have Judicial Decrees decide their lives.
The fact that it was declared a Constitutional right can be applied to many contraversial subjects and to the right-to-life of a fetus as a human being as well, with which we do agree if the mother “chooses” to want the child. The law is unsettled and two-faced.
Posted by fred from Or at January 30, 2005 08:00 PM

[Ah, but Fred gets a pile-on after, sounds like he’s the outsider…]