“The Roe opinion itself was limited to the first trimester.” Umm, again, you are incorrect. Please read the opinion. The line was drawn at viability not at a trimester. In fact, based on the available scientific understanding then, the Court suggested viability was beyond the first trimester. Even if the Court limited it to the first trimester, that would hurt your argument b/c then regulation could occur after that, which of course would mean saying “can’t regulate abortion” is incorrect.
“But later, they ruled in other cases that the right to abortion applied in the second and third trimester as well, all the way up until the moment of birth.” Where are you getting this from? This is entirely incorrect. The post-Roe cases have eroded Roe, not stregthened it. The line has gone pushed back closer to the first trimester, not close toward birth. Please cite some sources, your characterization of the case law is completely unsupported.
“So the baby could be partially born, yet the mother still had a right to abortion.” What? I’d like to see you post anything from any cases supporting any of this nonsense you’ve posted; otherwise, “Brilliant” I see this is going no where because you’re simply making stuff up at this point.
No, actually, I’m not making it up. But I agree it’s going no where. I am not particularly interested in spending a lot of time educating you as to these decisions.