According to NARAL, and possibly others, Judge Roberts "is hostile ... to women’s reproductive rights" because he seeks to overturn Roe vs Wade. Now I know I'm probably being monstrously insensitive here, not to mention trivializing a serious issue, but ...
My recollection is that NARAL is the National Abortion Rights Action League and that Roe vs Wade is about the right to have an abortion. Hence once you decode their position what they are trying to say is that abortion is a reproductive right. Is it just me or do other people see something (oxy)moronic in that statement?
PS FWIW - I am OK with early abortions and become progressively less OK as the pregnancy develops, except in the case of a few people for whom I believe a post natal abortion should be mandated
PPS There is a lot of sense in this post, particularly the conclusion:
There are those of us who do not want to be pregnant, period. So adoption is not an option.
We are not public property, so lay off. When you get the urge to proclaim approval or disapproval for a woman's choice, do the opposite and shut it. Just shut it.
Because while abortion isn't horrible, enforced pregnancy is. As is pillorying women who refuse to be guilty for choosing differently than you.
although the problem IMHO is not so much that women are public property but that many husbands and families consider women to be their property and the rest of us prefer to not look too closely at what goes on inside the family.