Letter: The dangerous part of Roe v. Wade

The United States was founded on the principle that the states should have eminence over the federal government in almost all matters, which gives the best representation of the will of the people.

Since the Civil War, the federal government has been infringing more and more upon states' rights and eminence.

Before 19elbout abortion for themselves. Roe v. Wade stripped the states of the right to decide and placed abortion in federal control. Roe v. Wade was about much more than abortion; it was about states' rights. A true reversal of Roe v. Wade would remove federal control and return a right to the states. A federal ban of abortion would continue a very important part of Roe v. Wade.

Comparisons have been made about communism, Nazism and a reversal of Roe v. Wade. Any federal action to strip states of rights is a move toward totalitarianism and dictatorship. It was needed for ending slavery. Is it needed in abortion, either for or against?

What do people think about states' rights versus federal control, or do they think about it?

I feel that the federal government should have less control of our lives. I agree with Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who opposed Roe v. Wade even though she strongly advocated women's rights and equality. Our country has been moving toward totalitarianism for a long time, and the pace is quickening because that is what people want. We are seeing the dangerous part of Roe v. Wade.

Rich Lorimer

Streamwood