I happen to be in favor of overturning Roe vs. Wade, but not because of pro-life or pro-choice considerations. Roe vs. Wade should not have happened in the first place. The Constitution neither upholds nor denies (a) a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy; (b) the fetus's right to life; (c) the woman's right to refuse to undergo a medical procedure; (d) the proposition that the foregoing are none of society's business; or (e) the proposition that the state has no compelling interest in the continuance or termination of any pregnancy. On all of this, the Constitution is silent. Where the Constitution is silent, the Supreme Court should likewise be silent. These questions should be decided by Congress or by the state legislatures. It's even questionable whether Congress should have any say. Consider this, from the Bill of Rights:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
If Roe vs. Wade is overturned, then what is contemplated in Amendment X is what will happen. What the Framers planned for is what will happen.
Since you're not prolife, you wouldn't care right? Roe v. Wade as a standard is overwhelming popular in the country, so why wouldn't the Democrats just do that? Shouldn't they?
---the late great Donald Blake