Now a nominee for the Supreme Court, Kagan affirmed on Tuesday that as a justice she would rule as unconstitutional laws that restrict abortion to the point that a women's health is placed in danger.

I totally agree with this.  After all, are we not guaranted under the constitution the right to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Medical science has progressed to the point that accurate, evidence based, predictions can be made regarding the level of potential danger a woman may be in due to complications related to pregnancy.  Laws should not prohibit a woman from opting to save her life.

Not only is the woman's life jeopardized by forcing her to carry the pregnancy to term, risking her life in the process, the lives of her existing children are hugely impacted.  Suppose a woman who is the parent of two children dies because she is not allowed to abort a fetus.  There are now two children who may or may not have a father and/or other family who can take them in.  They become part of the foster care system - which may or may not be a good experience for them, and in which they may or may not remain together in the same foster home. 

The possible negative consequences are endless, and imagine the pain of the mother who knows she will die, leaving her children homeless and without someone to nuture and care for them.  Imagine the pain to two small children having lost their mother, and at risk, depending on the state to ensure that they are cared for, protected, and nurtured. 

Who has won?  The fetus? I don't think so.  The religious fanatic hell bent to control women's reproductive rights?  He/she may think he's won some kind of theological, moral victory.  I'd like to see how far the knowledge of a theological victory goes toward repairing the lives of two orphans.

End of rant.  Sorry.