[Hostage]

>>>The "right to privacy" emanates from the Ninth Amedment:

Nowhere in the 9th Amendment does it say people have a right to privacy in the context of killing their unborn child (or whatever word, e.g. fetus, chosen to avoid conviction.

It does affirm that the killing-abortion-murder of an unborn child-being-clump of tissue should not be denied as a right IF indeed it is a right.

The history of the ninth has quite a different context than the one you have stretched to fit your principles.

Roe vs. Wade presented the simple naked question of whether the killing of an unborn child was a right granted under the Constitution. By clever distraction it was cast into an argument concerning privacy.

Obviously the simple naked question is not a right under the Constitution but it may be a right under for example a State Constitution. If it were such a right then it would be protected under the U.S. Constitution by the 9th Amendment.

So the proper venue for Roe vs. Wade was with the State not the Constitution. The Supreme Court should have refused to hear it.

[tahiti]

"Nowhere in the 9th Amendment does it say people have a right to privacy in the context of killing their unborn child (or whatever word, e.g. fetus, chosen to avoid conviction."

I agree 100% with your remark above and do not know how you deduced from my comments that I advocated a constitutional justification for killing unborn children.

I was actually advocating quite the opposite.