? for the Pro-life/vote for Trump no matter what die hards..

I don't get the being opposed to abortion 'except in cases of...' If you truly believe life begins at conception I don't know how you can say killing of that life is EVER okay. FTR...I'm fully pro-choice, and I don't think there's anything wrong with first trimester abortions, or any other special circumstance abortion.

I'm in the camp that abortion should be between a woman and her doctor. PERIOD! I think the government needs to butt out.
On paper, I guess I am pro-life, since apparently you have to choose one or the other. I am adamantly opposed to late term abortion and abortion as a means of birth control.

ETA:  I guess I didn't answer your question.  Regardless of who I vote for or who runs for office in the future, I don't see Roe v. Wade ever being overturned.  

i agree with the - caring until birth and then they don't want to help

it seems like an oxymoron - to be so concerned with unborn life - but then so against any type of welfare (and I use that term as broadly as possible)

i just don't get it

my motto has always been - don't believe in abortion? then don't have one!

gina

Roe v. Wade isn't going anywhere. It's just not. The Court has been conservative since the Reagan years, even earlier according to some. They've had all that time to overturn the Roe decision, and they haven't. In fact, the Court has consistently struck down restrictions passed by states, the most recent being Texas.

I can understand someone voting for Trump to keep Hillary from appointing SC justices who will undoubtedly be liberal and swing the Court to the left. But if voters are counting on Trump to appoint someone who is conservative, they're going to be disappointed. He himself is not a conservative.

Hypothetically, if Roe V. Wade is overturned at the federal level, wouldn't the states then have the right to pass their own legislation pertaining to abortion rights? 

I am firmly in the pro-choice camp. 

I don't think they actually care what happens to those children who are born to people who cannot care for them.
Pro choice does not mean pro abortion. If you are morally opposed to abortion, then don't have one - that is your CHOICE.
Don't be thinking about, talking about, grabbing, or legislating my private areas.

I totally agree, and I'll take it a big step further. Remember the uproar when Donald Trump said "there has to be punishment for the woman." In his usual awkward, ignorant way, he was absolutely correct, but the pro-life movement doesn't want to go there because they know it will frighten average people off of the anti-abortion movement entirely.

The fact is, if you're going to make abortion illegal and punish doctors for performing them, then you must punish the women as well. Anything less is cowardly and avoiding reality for the sake of convenience. The women are not victims. They are willingly participating in the "crime." So if you want abortion to be illegal, I expect you to enforce the law against everyone involved, not just the doctors and nurses.

And I would like to see the pro-choice movement say this loudly and often, instead of hiding behind being outraged whenever some dumbass like Trump gets the party line all wrong. I think it would do abortion rights a big favor in many people's minds. 

ETA I too remember the days before Roe v. Wade. Never, never go back. So far, so good, but I also fear a Supreme Court loaded up with far right-wing justices.

I hear you monklady123 . I don't understand the narrowminded-ness that makes the leap that a choice is automatically an abortion.

Off topic, but I find myself wondering if those people have the same rigid stance on other subjects in their lives. I literally pray they never deal with end of life issues requiring feeding tubes and life support.

If, in this imaginary world, Roe v Wade gets overturned, abortion is not going anywhere except slightly underground... ever so slightly. Far too many actual doctors believe in choice and will find a way to provide the services. I do not provide termination services and I can think of several ways to do so legally in an imaginary world where there is no Roe v Wade.

There is a rumor going around that Hillary and Obama are ok with abortion up until 36 weeks for any reason, which is not helping matters at all.

And to go one step further, how about coming up with some kind of punishment for the man who got the woman pregnant in the first place? I'm firmly pro-choice, not yet safely through menopause and I have a daughter. The thought of Trump choosing Supreme Court justices scares the living crap out of me.

Bingo. If you oppose abortion, you oppose abortion and anybody who chooses one or performs one. When the Jesuits in college taught me situational ethics, abortion never qualified. It's either wrong or it's not wrong. 

(Note: The Catholic Church allows "indirect" abortions, abortions that are a result of cancer treatment and ectopic pregnancy intervention. Well, only sometimes with the ectopic pregnancies, depending on whether there's intention to save the tube. That's how precise the whole direct/indirect distinction is.)

btw: I believe abortion should be legal and accessible. Based on my upbringing, though, I've always been intrigued by the circular arguments supporting exceptions...and sidestepping "guilt."

Yes, and the problem, of course, is that wealthy women can far more readily afford the under-the-table services of someone like you who could do this safely.  The poor will end up with back alley butchers as they did in the past.  But why should Republicans give a crap about that?  The poor have never been their major concern anyway, and their wives and daughters will still be able to afford the "D&C" that their doctor can give them.

Sorry, my bitter is showing.

(I realize that I'm preaching to choir on this ...)

I don't for a minute believe Rowe vs Wade will be overturned anytime in the near future even with a Conservative leaning Supreme Court and a Trump presidency.