You. like them, twist the Constitution to say waht you wish it said.
Roe did not say the baby wasn’t a person. The Court said they had no scientific evidence telling them when life started. The Court specifically said that if there were ever scientific evidence showing THE STATES had a compelling interest in writing laws to protect that life.
You twist what the Court said like you twist what the Constitution says. That is typical of statists.
But you never answered the question. Why should a pre-born baby have special protections a one-hour-old baby doesn’t have or a twenty-year-old doesn’t have?
Wow.
I already posted the portion of Roe that clearly declared the child in the womb not to be a person and therefore not protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. Why do you keep ignoring this clear fact?
As you your last point, I have no idea where you got such a notion.