[tacticalogic]

Tell me, just how is it that you can reduce the right to life, which the founders always place as the first unalienable right, of course, to the level of a mere “penumbra” or “emanation”?

I haven't done that. They left the "protection of life" to the States. You want to make it a "penumbra" or "emanation" in order to try take it out of their hands and turn it over to the federal government.

[EternalVigilance]

They left the "protection of life" to the States.

No, they didn't. They stated the equal protection of the God-given, unalienable right to life as being the first and most important raison d'etre, or reason for existence, of ALL governments.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."

[EternalVigilance]

So, other than the supreme right, which other unalienable rights do you believe should be “left up to the states”?

[EternalVigilance]

In my previous posts I've laid out the founders' principles and purposes.

Then there are the explicit, IMPERATIVE requirements of the Constitution. In case there are any readers from Rio Linda, that means that they are NOT OPTIONAL.

"No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law."

"No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Let me ask you the question clearly. A yes or no reply will do:

Is the child in the womb a person, or not?