um yes, it is true that the Comstock laws were struck down on the basis of the right to privacy it doesn't matter..there is no political will to remove contraception (well maybe plan B but..). Even if the court ruled that contraception wasn't protected under the right to privacy, most conservative evangelicals use and want contraception nowadays..(and now criticize Catholics for opposing it) so why would they want to ban it?
Both sides have problems with abortion.. for the left, they have to deal with the fact that biologically, and phenomenologically, a fetus is a human child (maybe not fetal personhood), but this means all abortions can be easily seen as a type of Filicide (killing one's own offspring). By embracing abortion too heavily (especially as the fetus is more developed in the womb) they risk losing the moral war. For the right, criminalizing a procedure that has been around for thousands of years, including through much of [Catholic] medieval Europe -- largely without penalty (if not in law then in practice) risks turning the right into a more totalitarian party (and Jan 6th isn't helping either).
To my above comment, Also, before I get any haters.. my argument is NOT saying that a *fetus must be a human child* only those biological and phenomenological arguments can give credence to the idea that abortion is a type of Filicide, and if this sticks the left will lose the moral war. (after all that's why 'my body my choice' if that choice involves a type of murder). The left needs to deal with the core argument, which is to say that abortion is not Filicide. And this is why abortion is a hot-button issue.