And I showed you text that the founders did not include the unborn as having a right to life.
Roe vs Wade decided against the fetal right to life augment.
Roe v Wade - edited text
It is very clear that you have never read the roe case.
Take a look sometime at the majority decision from roe v wade. There is no decision there that gives a woman the right to kill another human being. Here is how the unborn child is spoken of in roe v wade:
Such an action, however, would appear to be one to vindicate the parents' interest and is thus consistent with the view that the fetus, at most, represents only the potentiality of life.
"Though the State cannot override that right, it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman's health and the
potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a "compelling" point at various stages of the woman's approach to term." Pp. 147-164.
For the stage subsequent to viability the State, in promoting its interest in the
potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother. Pp. 163-164; 164-165.
In assessing the State's interest, recognition may be given to the less rigid claim that as long as at least
potential life is involved, the State may assert interests beyond the protection of the pregnant woman alone.
The Court's decisions recognizing a right of privacy also acknowledge that some state regulation in areas protected by that right is appropriate. As noted above, a State may properly assert important interests in safeguarding health, in maintaining medical standards, and in protecting
potential life.
Those striking down state laws have generally scrutinized the State's interests in protecting health and
potential life, and have concluded that neither interest justified broad limitations on the reasons for which a physician and his pregnant patient might decide that she should have an abortion in the early stages of pregnancy
As we have intimated above, it is reasonable and appropriate for a State to decide that at some point in time another interest, that of health of the mother or that of
potential human life, becomes significantly involved.
We repeat, however, that the State does have an important and legitimate interest in preserving and protecting the health of the pregnant woman, whether she be a resident of the State or a nonresident who seeks medical consultation and treatment there, and that it has still another important and legitimate interest in protecting the
potentiality of human life.
With respect to the State's important and legitimate interest in
potential life, the "compelling" point is at viability. [/I]
The fact is that whenever the child was mentioned by the court, it was called a potential human life. In order to justify their decision, they had to assume that it was not a human being because they knew perfectly well that to admit that the child was alive and human was to admit that it was a living human being and in the eyes of the law, all living human beings are persons and all persons in this country are entitled to the protection of the 14th amendment.
If you went to court and sued to be allowed to raise chickens on your property and the court decided that yes, indeed, you have a right to raise chickens on your property and said as much in thier decision, do you believe that gives you the right to raise ducks? You have a right to do what the court says you can do, but no particular right at all to do something that the court has not even addressed.
The court said that a woman has the right to end a "potential human life". If the court says that a woman has the right to end a "potential human life" I would have to agree. It isn't "potential human lives" however, that women are terminating when they have abortions. They are killing living human beings. If you want to justify the decision, you are going to have to show, in some real way, that unborns are only "potential human lives".
OK, I've issued some infractions. I will gladly issue more if you all don't cease the personal attacks.