Most divisive aftermath for Roe v Wade

Disclosure: I am pro-life
What sequelea of the Roe v Wade decision of 1973 are the most divisive plausible?
Note: I am not interested in debating abortion here, I want to explore other outcomes of the decision that could have strained our culture more than OTL.
 
The PoD is the day of the decision. The decision we historically had. Given the decision as it was, what would make the results more divisive?
 
You want seriously divisive?
Try this:
The pro-life movement decides that it is going to use low-level but widespread violence/intimidation coupled with wholesale jury nullification (i.e., it instructs its members, bonus points if the Catholic church says this is a religious duty, to find anyone innocent in such cases) to acquit all of their perpetrators and proxys to get its way. This results in a cycle of escalation between the establishment and the movement. How does the justice apparatus respond, for instance, when large numbers of obviously 'guilty' defendants are acquitted or have the juries hang? Overreact and you're likely to have the beginnings of a civil war on your hands.
 
EHWM,

I imagine that would lead to investigation and infiltration of the Catholic Church for intelligence-gathering purposes and that might lead to the pedophile scandal being broken earlier.

If the RCC is being defiant of the legalization of abortion to the point of undermining the rule of law, revealing that most of the bishops had been involved in shuffling perverted priests around (and thus allowing them to continue to molest children) would destroy its moral authority. OTL that has happened, at least in some areas--I remember an article in Christianity Today about how in the Boston area many Catholics have left the church and they could be evangelized.
 
MerryPrankster,
I suspect that's the least of the dirty tricks that both sides will bring to bear. A lot will depend on the willingness of the Catholic church to wield the excommuniation bell, book, and candle.
 
Any more divisive than OTL and you might kill the pro-life movement in the US. This would probably lead to more violence on the part of pro-life organizations which would in turn discredit the movement in the eyes of the mainstream public. It would be the equivalent of the weatherman phase for hippies in the late 60's or early 70's. Opposition to abortion would become political poison, meaning that conservative politicians would not be able to use it as a wedge issue and it would become either a dead debate or an elephant in the room that becomes increasingly irrelevant, kind of like the gun control debate today.
 
You want seriously divisive?
Try this:
The pro-life movement decides that it is going to use low-level but widespread violence/intimidation coupled with wholesale jury nullification (i.e., it instructs its members, bonus points if the Catholic church says this is a religious duty, to find anyone innocent in such cases) to acquit all of their perpetrators and proxys to get its way. This results in a cycle of escalation between the establishment and the movement. How does the justice apparatus respond, for instance, when large numbers of obviously 'guilty' defendants are acquitted or have the juries hang? Overreact and you're likely to have the beginnings of a civil war on your hands.

It could go the other way as well. I could see a POD where people use Roe v Wade to force through laws sanctioning assisted suicide and a full state sanctioned eugenics program.
 
It could go the other way as well. I could see a POD where people use Roe v Wade to force through laws sanctioning assisted suicide and a full state sanctioned eugenics program.

Pro choice people don't support eugenics. The eugenics movement had been completely discredited by 1973.
 
Top