There is one more element in the equation that goes into the effort to roll back legal abortion in test cases like South Dakota, and that is how strange it is that an administration that prides itself on a "free market" economy, daily pollutes the environment by deregulating greenhouse gas emissions, by allowing gross polluting trucks, under NAFTA, to pour toxic waste into California's air, now wants to regulate decisions a woman makes in the privacy of her own home, and in consultation with her physician.
In fact, these "free market" folks want to transform licensed physicians into government pitch men who function as FDA warning labels on a pack of cigarettes. Yes, they're into free markets, not free women.
Moreover, should Roe v. Wade be overturned, or turned over to the states to decide, there won't be fewer abortions, only fewer poor women having abortions, so this is not about ideology, after all, but about privilege.
Keep in mind, too, that the word "regle," in French, means "rule." Fascinating, isn't it, how those who are best at breaking the rules, in Washington, these days, are working hard at making rules from which they may, someday, too claim immunity.
As a society, we're willing to immunize cheats, liars, war criminals, and law breakers, but prosecute any physician who acknowledges a woman's constitutional right to seek remedy from an unwanted pregnancy.
Any arranged marriage between health, politics, and religion is one that can only lead to divorce.
After the National Security Agency scandal, and revelations of telecom eavesdropping, any illusions we had, as citizens, to privacy have been quickly dispelled.
The "war on terror" is really a war on privacy, after all, is it not?
Leave regulation for the oil companies, military contractors, banks, and credit card companies that are gouging the consumer, and keep them the hell out of our private lives.