That's NOT what it says. it does NOT say ONLY (following your own principle of letteralism). It says:
"NOR shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law;
In other words, by your own logic, while citizens enjoy certain priviledges, etc., it is ALSO true that you cannot willy-nilly murder ANY innocent person (born, unborn, non-citizen, being incidental) without due process.
btw, just out of curiosity, how do you think judge Bork would interpret the 14th amendment re non-citizens (e.g., legal residents, etc.). non-applicable?
"nor shall ANY PERSON be...deprived of LIFE, without due process of law"
Please note there is nothing in the context of this amendment that limits said interpretation to citizens or already born persons as you attempted to argue re the 14th amendment.
The constitution clearly protects ALL persons from certain unwarranted deprivations, whether or not many (or even most) judges have not thought it through.
In other words, the state may not kill you, incarcerate you, or deprive you of your property without due process.
BTW: care to guess how cases of abortion caused by the actions of a third party (i.e., Jonh Doe negligently or willfully causing spontaneous abortion without the consent of the mother) were adjudicated?
As torts. Not as murder.
The unborn child was legally considered property.
The due process clause would forbid forcible abortion by the state on that basis.
You would need the equal protection clause.
Now, let's look at the equal protection clause:
"...nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside..."
Unborn children are not within the jurisdiction of the 14th Amendment.