I'm not a scholar. Don't even play one on TV.
My opinion comes as a result of, what I think is, common sense.
You can't have 'liberty' or the 'pursuit of happiness' without life.
That's why they listed 'life' first.
No idea as to what your opinion happens to be. The question I had commented on had to do with whether there is a specifically articulated right to privacy in the Constitution - there isn't.
I had further commented that some scholars go to the ninth amendment in that regard, however lamely.
More specifically, nothing stops any individual state's constitution from specifically articulating that right. It was AZConservative's observation that Madison believed that the 9th and 10th basically made sure that the individual states could and should be the ones to deal with such things as privacy.
I merely agreed with that observation.
If you are commenting as to how bass ackwards we can get in reading a right to abortion into the constitution, I'd agree with you as well. I think almost everybody agrees, even though they won't admit it on one side of the argument, that Roe v. Wade was an end run around what was bound to be a much harder fight - getting the right to an abortion in all 50 states.
However, elections have consequences, and liberals/communists being renowned (notorious?) for the cubic footage of bloodshed per historical time unit, a liberal court gave us a law that has so far resulted in the death of over 29.5 million US citizens, with a 1000 more each day.
The Democratic party in the US has managed to make Hitler and Stalin's work in WWII look like amateur night.