Bigun, I'm emphatically pro-choice, but not with abortion as a desirable method of birth control. And, just as "ban guns" legislation will NOT eliminate guns or gun violence, neither will legislation eliminate abortions. Providing better, more effective, means to desired ends (reduction in gun violence, and births that are wanted) is a better approach than the punishment method -- just as rewards are generally more effective than punishments with students, children, and employees.
Because then the people who are impacted feel as though they have some investment in the end goal. And end goal of "no guns" and an end goal of "no abortions" are win-lose ends, from the point of view of a significant portion of the population. We want goals that we can agree on, and that are important enough to work across aisles.
I thought your gun proposal was well-thought-out, and a good start to getting a conversation going at the legislative level. Obviously, like the meat in sausage, the end result will not resemble any inputs in the least....
As far as abortions are concerned, is it more important to reduce unwanted births, or to punish "careless" sex? I'm hoping your goal is the reduction of unwanted births, with abortion as a medical procedure only, not as a birth-control procedure (and knowing your level of thoughtfulness, I'll bet if it isn't that, it's for some reason I didn't anticipate, not just knee-jerk reaction).
So; how do we get our congress-critters to start defining goals that people can get behind, in ways that people can get behind them without too many of them being driven away by the dividers who only think they can grow if someone else is diminished?
I'm addressing this to you because, frankly, you listen. And thanks.
Wendy P.