So you want the courts to "interpret" a ban on abortion based on the 14th Amendment? Abortion ultimately comes down to a belief as to when an unborn baby is legally and morally a person. I believe the pro-life side is making progress in convicing the public on that account, so I don't fear leaving it up to the political process to determine. I do fear a black robed dictatorship. Whether soveriegnty rests with the people or not is IMHO a more importatnt moral question than even abortion.
Unalienable rights are not up for a majority vote. Sorry. That is the recipe for destruction of the basis for the form of republican self-government our forebears risked their lives, honor and fortunes to deliver to us.
Defending innocent human life is not a dictatorial act. It is an act of justice.
Our Constitution was established in order to "establish Justice," and states as its ultimate purpose "to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves AND OUR POSTERITY."
The word "POSTERITY" has a very specific meaning, one that is completely ignored by those who take your position.
By the way, the sworn oath to uphold the Constitution, including the obligation to protect innocent human life, is not just taken by judges. It is sworn before God by all officers of government, in every branch, and at every level.
That's exactly what Blackmun did, explicitly. He knew that the Fourteenth Amendment protects ALL innocent persons, and so he did the only thing her could do: he dehumanized the child. He knew, and admitted in the decision itself, that this was the only way they could put a fig leaf over their decision.
Do you believe a child in utero is a person?
If you say "yes," you can't get around the fact that they are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
If you say "no," you're taking the exact same position as Judge Blackmun.
Those who admit the child is a person, and still assert that states can allow their killing, are, in fact, WORSE THAN BLACKMUN.
That's exactly what Blackmun did, explicitly. He knew that the Fourteenth Amendment protects ALL innocent persons, and so he did the only thing he could do: he dehumanized the child. He knew, and admitted in the decision itself, that this was the only way they could put a fig leaf over their decision.
Do you believe a child in utero is a person?
If you say "yes," you can't get around the fact that they are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
If you say "no," you're taking the exact same position as Judge Blackmun.
Those who admit the child is a person, and still assert that states can allow their killing, are, in fact, WORSE THAN BLACKMUN.