I’ve read the Roe decision, and I think its determination that a fetus is not “a person” within the meaning of the Constitution and its amendments is correct.
Certainly none of the Founders had any idea they were prohibiting abortion, which was widely practiced at the time.
Here’s James Wilson, one of the Founders:
“With consistency, beautiful and undeviating, human life, from its commencement to its close, is protected by the common law. In the contemplation of law, life begins when the infant is first able to stir in the womb. By the law, life is protected not only from immediate destruction, but from every degree of actual violence, and, in some cases, from every degree of danger.[6]”
Their understanding of fetal life was of course flawed, but I’m not sure we’re entitled to retrospectively change the meaning of the Constitution as desired. To me such a Constitution is a little too living.
I respect those who believe otherwise, but that’s my opinion.
It was not “widely practiced.” Not even close.
If the child is not a “Constitutional person,” no one is. Because every single human being alive, or who has ever lived, at least since since Adam and Eve, was at one point developing and growing in their mother’s womb.
It’s not very often you will see a FReeper say that they agree with the illogical, immoral, unconstitutional Roe decision.
First of all, the Roe decision NEVER says that the unborn baby isn't a person, it says that there's no case law saying that it is:
The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a "person" within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well-known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment. The appellant conceded as much on reargument. On the other hand, the appellee conceded on reargument that no case could be cited that holds that a fetus is a person within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.
There is NOTHING to stop a law or executive order recognizing the personhood of the unborn.
Nevertheless, what's most disturbing is that YOU don't believe that the baby is a person. What is the baby if not a person?
Certainly none of the Founders had any idea they were prohibiting abortion, which was widely practiced at the time.
Patently FALSE!
Abortion was illegal in every state at the time of the Constitution. Granted, it was only a misdemeanor before the "quickening," but this has more to do with the understanding of development.
I respect those who believe otherwise, but that’s my opinion.
So, in your opinion, you believe the Founding Fathers were fine with abortion and would be delighted to see 4000 babies being slaughtered each day?
Dude, I’m looking at the crystal ball, and your future as a FReeper is looking mighty tenuous.
By the way, your claim that unborn children are not protected by the Constitution is wrong not only because of the things I’ve already pointed out to you, but because what you’re saying is also an explicit violation of the principles contained in the Ninth Amendment, which is basically that just because a right is not enumerated in the Constitution that doesn’t mean that the people don’t retain it.
Again, the individual, equal right to life is enumerated, in multiple amendments, but even if it wasn’t, that right would still be intrinsic to every single innocent person.
Because our God-given, unalienable rights precede and supersede all man-made laws and constitutions.
Madison and Hamilton and others didn’t want a bill of rights in the Constitution originally, because they feared that some would do exactly what you are doing in this exchange.
They lost the political argument on that with the anti-federalists, and agreed to help pass the first dozen amendments, as long as the Ninth Amendment was included.
Doesn’t help much though if folks like yourself pretend it doesn’t exist, and thereby violently strip tens of millions of innocent persons of their most important right, the right without which no other right can ever be enjoyed.
Amendment IX
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”