Very informative article as a refresher on the anniversary

"The prominence of the national debate over abortion, not slowing one bit over thirty years, is similar to that over slavery in terms of intensity and longevity."

Twin Decisions: The bad news delivered on January 22, 1973.
By G. Tracy Mehan III

"I was a student at Saint Louis University School of Law when I learned of the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade...
... For my part, I felt as if I had been struck a blow to the head which rendered me incapable of coherent thought. The highest tribunal of the United States of America had struck down every law restricting abortion, be it strict or lenient, in every state. It effectively established a radical right to abortion, on demand, for all nine months of pregnancy.
Yes, All Nine.
This last point might escape readers familiar only with Roe and not its companion case, Doe v. Bolton. Roe established a regulatory regime, based on the division of a pregnancy into trimesters. In the first trimester, the decision was left exclusively to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman and her physician. In the second trimester, the state could choose to regulate abortion only for the protection of the woman's health.
But subsequent to "viability," which Justice Blackmun, Roe's author, reckoned to be at about seven months, the state could promote its interest in the "potentiality of human life" (his term) by regulation, even to the point of proscribing abortion outright — "except where it is necessary in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother." This last statement — called "a cunning phrase" by the retired federal appellate judge John T. Noonan, Jr. — when read in connection with Doe v. Bolton, the evil twin of Roe, was the undoing of almost any regulation or prohibition of late-term abortions....

... 'Cosmic Issue' -- Another professor of mine, the historian James Hitchcock, once referred to the issue of abortion as 'cosmic.' I took him to mean that where someone stood on this issue would be determined by the fundamental way in which he understood human beings and their relation to reality. Where someone stood on this issue would be indicative of how he related to other human beings, whether as objects or subjects, means or ends, mere matter or the image of the divine.
It was many years later when I grasped this insight. I initially thought, "Surely, the empirical evidence of the humanity of the unborn will win over even the most liberal of people, given their regard for humanity, especially those that are defenseless..."...I was convinced that reason, grounded in empirical evidence, could win the hearts and minds of Americans of all ideological stripes.
I underestimated the sheer willfulness of human beings, especially in matters of sexual behavior. Any recognition of the humanity of the unborn would force an unwelcome crisis in accepted notions of sexual freedom. The premium placed on personal autonomy, to the exclusion of all else, precluded concern for the unborn...." See complete article at:
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/mehan200601230847.asp
— G. Tracy Mehan III, a lawyer, served as assistant administrator of water at the EPA in President Bush's first term.