A few somewhat pithy comments, but there's something in them, I think.

[BlueCheeseAgain]

First: If the court says that "the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives", why don't we cut out the elected representatives part, and you know, let people regulate their own abortions?

Second: There are about 400,000 kids in foster care in the US right now. If just 1% of people who call themselves pro-life were to adopt one of them, all of them would be in loving homes. So why aren't they?

[Freddie]

1. #2 because people want infants

Gotta keep up the domestic supply.

[Thunderbeast]

5. WHITE infants

[Backseat Driver]

7. of lower socioeconomic taxpayer prey and military cannon fodder?

Looks a lot like TPTB, RW fundies aka American Taliban, have moved on some from just POC. When the white ones get old enough, they can prey on their kid(s) perhaps larger but not wealthy-enough economic status in a great many other ways.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

2. .

If just 1% of people who call themselves pro-life were to adopt one of them, all of them would be in loving homes.

I would not assume the homes they would be in are loving, or that they were taken out of homes that weren't.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

4. +1000 esp. the point that a foster home is not by definition 'unloving' (nt)

[BComplex]

6. If they are taken into the homes of right wing nut jobs against abortion or women's rights,

that's not IMHO a very good environment.

[blm]

3. ✔️✔️