I guess I should have made something clear on the onset of talking about abortions. Strong advocates of the pro-life movement have allied themselves with fiscal conservatives. Their argument is that they have done this to actually get the right people elected in government. The unfortunate consequence of this is that it has brought up other social conservative ideas into the political arena, as well. Some of these ideas include the gay marriage debate, abortion, etc. The other consequence of this is that we are not treating abortions like we are treating anything else in the world. Imagine if we treated heart disease or cancer the same way that we treat abortions. Instead of having the proper education for people about trying to prevent heart disease or cancer we decided it was wrong at the end to treat the cancer or heart disease in a particular method. That's what we're doing with abortions in this country. Note: I am not saying pregnancy is a disease. The problem is that the fiscal conservatives who are allied with pro-life people have decided that they are not going to spend excess money on trying to prevent pregnancies because that money can be better used elsewhere.
Is this alliance really necessary? With the Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of legalizing abortions. It is not possible, I do not think, for Congress to be able to overturn the Supreme Court ruling and make abortions illegal. So, what are those people who are being elected on the pro-life ticket actually doing when it comes up to abortion issues? How many abortion issued arise each year? I'll go back to 1998 to the present and see what issues are being voted on that are considered to be abortion issues.