Not all pregnancies are the result of consensual sex, so they can't all be prevented. Also, what lay people call abortion and what the medical profession calls abortion are not always the same thing. Removal of a deceased fetus by D&C, for example, is considered an abortion by doctors, but most people I know would not have any objection to that and would be shocked that it is considered an abortion.

Federal government is in overreach. Thank God for federalism. Those who want to can sell their fetal baby parts to planned parenthood for cash and fun. http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/abo...

well
we do have one case of immaculate contraception on record

:-)

Absolutely. Also, why aren't the fathers included in the conversation by the left. It seems women get pregnant either by rape or immaculate contraception.,

"...it might be used in attempts to get the federal government out of other areas which the Constitution doesn't grant it authority." Now wouldn't THAT be something!

Yup

simple
democrats want to either murder the unborn or have sex with them after they are born

and selling baby parts is big business

Well if the camel gets his head inside the tent, pretty soon he'll get his entire body in. And there goes the rest of our 'states rights'...as they've already done with education.

In 1971, the Supreme Court created a bizarre 'right to privacy' that basically prevented states from outlawing abortion. There was no Congress-passed law.

The Constitution does support, in a somewhat limited way, limits on the power of the state to investigate people for criminal actions, such as requiring search and arrest warrants.
If I commit a crime, no 'right to privacy' prevents the state from investigating, charging, and arresting me.

The Constitution doesn't grant the Federal government authority to collect and save information about the activities of its citizens, aside from what is necessary to carry out its Constitution-authorized activities. This restriction does not apply to the states.

As I understand it, the pending Supreme Court decision undoes the bizarre 'right to privacy', returning the matter to the states. As things stand, some states will ban it, while others are considering decriminalizing infanticide up to 28 days after birth. I would think that states could also ban the import, prescription, and use of 'morning after' pills.

As this pending decision would strengthen the 10th amendment (powers not delegated to Congress are reserved for the States or the People), it might be used in attempts to get the federal government out of other areas which the Constitution doesn't grant it authority.

Far too many people have no understanding of personal responsibility for their actions,
and that is exactly what the deep state wants - dependent serfs.
As I understand it, if Row vs Wade is reversed, it merely repeals a federal
law (extending the 14th amendment to abortion) and allows each state to
decide what the state law on abortion is.
It does not make abortion a federal crime.

In fact, a repeal would seem to benefit the Big Pharma industry
who have a morning after pill that could be a big seller in states
where abortions are not legal.