In favoring the mother over the unborn child, they are favoring the powerful over the powerless, a reversal of the lefts usual position. Their claim that an unborn baby "isn't human", just doesn't pass the smell test, especially with late term pregnancies.
The second hypocrisy is hammering this as a "right of privacy" for the mother and her doctor. While not supporting the "right of privacy" for men and women to control their own bodies regarding drug usage. The constitution clearly gives us a "right of privacy" to control every action of our bodies, or it doesn't. Pick one.
ping for later
We will win this fight. It will take awhile, but momentum is on our side. Abortion is an ugly business, and more people are beginning to realize it.
Although I understand your point and I am a staunch pro-lifer, your logic is in error.
First: The constitution gives us no rights. Our rights exist before and above the constitution. If it disappeared today, you will still have rights endowed by the Creator.
Second: A right need not be absolute. You do not have an absolute right to free speech or press; slander, libel, and child porn are not protected speech or press. Your right to peacefully assemble does not include a rally on the I-10/610 interchange in Houston at 5:30 pm on a Tuesday afternoon. You right to practice religion does not include child sacrifice.
Third: Just because a right is not listed in the Constitution does not mean it does not exist. Read the 9th amendment.
To summarize:
Our rights, granted by the Creator, are not absolute. When they infringe on the rights of others (like the unborn child), or even society as a whole, they can be legally and morally infringed upon. Your right to be secure in your person, paper, house, and things (i.e. the right to keep things private) does exist. It, however, is not absolute.