Now come the anti-abortion people who with their high moral authority argue that people make choices and we need to stop people form making bad choices, i.e. having sex I guess or getting divorced or choosing an a narcist for President of the United State, so they need to be punished and have the child. Once they pass these bills they wash their hands of the problem. So what is the solution when you get to a Supreme Court that seems hell bent on making life hard for young people in so many ways but easy for rich people and corporations or in this case, their religious obligations to not take a life needlessly (and yet are for the death penalty, very old testament).
For too long the lawyers representing the pro-Choice people have argued logic and the rights of a woman to choose. Maybe we need to turn this around, make this an argument of fundamental fairness. If we are going to lose in the Supreme Court because the books have been cooked, then lets go it the other way --
Yes Justice Alito, Baron, Kavanagh, Roberts, etc. we agree with the basic point that the State of Texas or Louisiana or Alabama may decide to ban abortions at six weeks, but not entirely, and that this will leave the clinics and people in these States with a problem, but they could be quicker off the draw, but if this is allowed to stand, then these same States must also give the person who is denied an abortion because a fetal heartbeat is detected, say at seven weeks or nine weeks or 15 weeks, because you have made the cost and burden so onerous and difficult as to render it impossible for the woman to exercise her right to choose, then the State must offer another remedy for the family to have the child and raise it properly. At the present time the cost of a child being raised by a family in the State of Texas is $ 500,000. Assuming a standard rate of inflation, then the parent or parents must be given a family support payment of this amount each year until the child reaches maturity, a point after college but before graduate school.
Now what if this were the ruling of the court, you can have your right to make abortion difficult, but the remedy must be full support for the family to raise the child. I would imagine that suddenly this anti-abortion fever would find itself snuffed out by the ill logic. When you deny a woman the right to choose you burden her and her friends and family with the added costs of child not unwanted, but unaffordable. It is time we make the Conservatives on the court understand that this is the reason people often go seek out help. If the lawyers make that point, force the Court to propose this as the remedy for those States, then the laws would fly off the books so fast, or at least I suspect they would.