So like, some people say "this issue is decided, it has been for a long time. Abortion is legal, so give up."
I'm wondering if they feel the same way about 2nd amendment rights to firearms, which seem pretty well ingrained too.
I'm assuming you are asking this question to people advocating for the abolishing of the 2nd amendment, and I have to ask, who the hell is doing that?
I'm asking that question to people who want to limit others' constitutionally protected (and reinforced by recent, explicit supreme court caselaw) right to bear arms.
My only point is that it's lame to cite established Supreme Court decisions as an argument for others to give up fighting a perceived injustice. I could just have easily used Dred Scott as an example.
But in this case your comparison is flawed. Professed "pro-lifers" want Roe v. Wade abolished, over turned. Gun control advocates aren't advocating for all guns to be banned in all cases like pro lifers want with abortion. Sure there are people advocating that we melt every gun in America but that's an extremist view, not held by anyone posting here. Pro choice supporters like gun control advocates recognize the constitutional right of both but identify the need for laws to regulate each. Gun rights advocates push back on regulatory laws, as do pro lifers.
I agree that gun control isn't apples to apples with abortion.
Again, my only point in making that comparison was targeted at CNS's argument (which perhaps I should've quoted) -- that saying "this issue has already been decided by the Supreme Court" is a ridiculously weak argument, because society's views (along with the law) can and do evolve.
For the record, saying "all abortions should be banned under every circumstance" is an extremist viewpoint too. The last data I saw showed overwhelming support for exceptions in case of danger to the mother's life, and a majority of support that make exceptions for rape and incest.
