Ahem
Read once again my example: A Congress 52% women, 48% men, in strict accordance to the % of population
Of the 48% men, 35% anti-abortion, 13% pro
Of the 52% women, 17% anti-abortion, 35% pro
Final tally, 52% votes anti-abortion, 35% from men, 17% from women. A “majority of women” was in chambers. But it was NOT the votes of a majority within the women that carried the day.
Still in favor of the example?
Now, what I say: this is still (IMO) a wrong decision; but it IS procedurally legitimate because those 52% are the designated proxies of a majority of the electorate (and by extension, of women). But then, ANY 52% of Congress legally represent a nominal majority of the electorate including women. So WHOEVER makes up Congress, it is procedurally legitimate for them to legislate on any issue.
Now, if you are arguing the metaphysical impossibility of it being “fair” for any male to make a decision about abortion, you bring the debate to an unsolvable standoff and we may as well all go home as we’ll get nowhere.
… Oh, and about k2dave’s example, yes, “whites can vote for that” (notice he didn’t say they HAD…) ANYONE can vote for ANYTHING if they are in Congress, that’s precisely the root of what bothered you about the current situation! Whether the courts let such a vote stand up, that’s a whole 'nother kettle of fish.

