Yes. In the constitution the government has all of its powers listed. These are called delegated powers, and belong solely to the federal government. Everything not mentioned in the constitution as a delegated power is a reserved power and belongs to the states alone. Granted, there are some concurrent powers and the federal government constantly oversteps it bounds. However, I am certain that the founding fathers did not think of abortion when they made the US constitution, so it probably isn't listed anywhere. Therefore, it would fall under the reserved power category and the decision would fall solely to states.
Permalink | Report

practically everything that the federal government does should be left to the states and the people.

10th Amendment, anyone?
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am10
Permalink | Report

I think there might be a problem with the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment on that. Since the Federal government would have already taken a stand on the issue allowing it, states would not be allowed to ban it.

The 10th Amendment saying that it leaves to the states things the Federal government has no stake in might also be another sticking point.
Source(s):
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am14

Permalink | Report

And of course, if it fell to the states to decide, all anyone in a conservative, abortion-banning state would have to do is take a little trip to the liberal abortion-allowing state of their choice, so no real change there.
Permalink | Report

Abortion is already legal on a Federal level.
States (individually) have slowly eroded the health rights of grown women over the last 16 years.  It should not be the Fed (nor state) Government's right nor ability to make certain personal and family decisions for (only) one sector of the population (i.e. women) if it purports to be a truly FREE society. 

One aim of Sex education should be to make abortions rare and a decision of last resort -- not to make them illegal. 

There are privacy rights involved too-- the right for a woman (with her family/friends)  to make reproductive AND health choices for herself, her family etc., unencumbered by the morality, religious or personal influences of outsiders.  Otherwise, you have the Government telling you how and what to do in regards to your family.  That is not a Free society.  That is gender inequality and fascist.

Perhaps some of you don't remember what it was like to be in a time where women didn't have control over their own sexuality or reproductive rights, but I seriously doubt you want to return to a time when strangers-- particularly men should control how and what women do with their own bodies. 
No such State (neither Federal nor States' rights level) presently mandates the reproductive rights of men. (That is to say, there would be an inherent inequity in telling/legislating what a woman can do w/ her body but not what men should be required to do.)

What if men were told that if they didn't meet certain societal "requirements" they would be forced to have certain medical procedures-- like a vasectomy ?

A free people and nation should never want to usurp privacy rights and be so biased as to think it has the RIGHT to tell 50% of the population what reproductive choices are available to them while extending no such limitations to the other half of the population. 
Permalink | Report

Completely aside from the debate on abortion, note that out and out murder is not a federal crime except on federal land or waters. If you shoot someone dead, you will be prosecuted under state laws against murder. So, hypothetically, even if abortion really was murder, it would still be a state function.
Permalink | Report

I believe so. If a family can't survive with a kid on another kid then they shouldn't have to. more of a strain on the government. The money should be put in to education and even free contraception. The last thing a child need is to be born in to a family that doesn't want it and it will have to have a sad life.
Permalink | Report

Personally, I don't think that anyone has the right to tell a woman what to do with her body. Allowing abortions to be legal does not make them mandatory, but removing that choice, for a woman to have one if she feels that is the best decision, in my opinion is wrong. Thus, I don't think either the federal government or the state governments should be able to limit that choice.
Permalink | Report

I am of two minds on this question. A part of me wants to say "Yes, let each individual state decide." We all know that cheesehead dave is right. If abortion was illegal in one state almost any woman wanting an abortion could go to another state. It's tempting to use this for a lot of controversial social problems, like gun control or the death penalty. But another part of me, the part of me that reads history books like some people use their cell phone, remembers how fleeting most systems of government have been in the world. Many Americans take it for granted that the United States is and always will be. I don't. I certainly hope that our country lasts for a thousand years but I doubt it. But I think we will last a lot longer if we bite the bullet of civilization, and make these decisions together as one people, and live with the results of our decisions.
Permalink | Report

No. Abortions should not be left up to the states to decide either. It is a personal decision, and the government in no way should be involved with the medical procedures of individuals. That being said, the states should also not FUND abortion either. Tax dollars are being spent on abortion reduction, and that is unjustified as well.
I might add this as a qualifier: The question of whether or not abortion is right or wrong is not the question - this question can also be answered on an individual basis. After all, justifiability of such a philosophical question requires use of reason.
Source(s):
The Elements of Moral Philosophy -James Rachels

Permalink | Report