(plz read carefully, I advocate abortion) To improve abortion laws, Roe v Wade should be repealed.

I would like to first open by saying that I see this as being a very unique and rather odd debate. I have never seen anyone that is for abortion want to repeal Roe V. Wade. Secondly, before I start, I would like to second your motion that Wikipedia is by no means a generally accepted scholarly website, however, with certain hot topics their are people that really regulate the information, this is one of them, therefore we will use the quotes you provided. ---"The Court ruled that the state cannot restrict a woman's right to an abortion during the first trimester, the state can regulate the abortion procedure during the second trimester "in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health", and the state can choose to restrict or proscribe abortion as it sees fit during the third trimester when the fetus is viable ("except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother")" The very fact that you feel that Roe V Wade places unfair and unjust restrictions on women is simply rather odd, because prior to this abortion was not legally allowed. Roe V Wade removed restrictions on abortion, leaving it up to the state to decide, which in turn leaves it up to the people, through electing representatives, etc. --You said: "The Supreme Court divides fetal time into trimesters. This is done ambiguously. there is nothing separating a fetus that is 6 months old from one who is 6 months and a day." AND "the supreme court does not have the ability to define what life is. If anything the medical community should and they were not consulted to make this decision." In fact it was not the supreme court that divided fetal time into trimesters, it was indeed the medical community that had done this long before the court case. Why? because specific and undeniable developmental features are characteristic in each stage, the supreme court simply followed the different developmental stages that were already established to make a decision. In fact they did this in order to allow abortions. Before Roe V Wade abortions were not supreme court supported, Roe V Wade established legal first trimester abortions, and left the rest up to the state. Once again I don't see how going from illegal abortions, to allowing abortions as being unfair to woman who want abortions. --You said: "Women cannot get an abortion after 6 months due to Roe V Wade, unless the health of the mother is in danger. This applies to everyone, including raped women or those kidnapped, etc." To be honest, the fact that a woman is allowed to have an abortion before 6 months seems to be REALLY fare. I myself wont inject my opinions into this debate, however, 6 months is really plenty of time to make the decision and get it done. You throw out there that women who are raped are stripped of the right to have an abortion. However, if a woman is raped, she should be aware of the risk of pregnancy, and determine the status before 6 months, a clue would be a missed period. Waiting 6 months is just not responsible, seeing as each day the baby develops more and more, and eventually crosses that fuzzy line of being defined as human or not. --you said: "I see no benefit from outlawing or mandating regulation of this abortion but I do see an infringement on liberty." After 6 months most of the medical world would agree that the baby is in fact a human. You seemed to desire the support of the medical world, and there it is. If the baby is to be delivered in America, this in result makes the baby an American. Allowing an American to be killed, is in fact an infringement on one of the protected rights of the constitution: the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Whereas the mother, is not denied of her life, or of her happiness, and at this point her liberty cannot be protected seeing as it infringes on the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of another American. The definition of "repeal" : "A repeal is the removal or reversal of a law. This is generally done when a law is no longer effective, or it is shown that a law is having far more negative consequences than were originally envisioned" The very premise of Roe V. Wade established abortion rights, and a womans right to choose. The repeal of this law, would essentially define it as causing more negative than positive. No abortion rights at all, to someone who is for abortion, is not better than some abortion rights, or defined abortion rights.