Replies

1. On what basis is it so obvious to you that a woman's egg, fertilized in the lab (or more conventionally?) is obviously not a being with rights?

Reason is my basis. - An egg is not a being, nor is a sperm. -- Combining them in a lab is not an act of creation. Months of gestation are necessary before a viable human being, with individual rights exists.
- So our existing law reasons, with no better solution. You have one? - Where?

2. Constitutional law is indeed a serious thing. Where, in the actual text of the Constitution, do you find a general right to abortion on demand? Or do you subscribe to the theory that if the constitutional ruling feels good or agrees with your preconceived notions, it must be good constitutional law?

The mothers right to life, liberty, and property will do. --- Or have you found some 'power' that would enable government to sequester pregnant women at the moment of conception?

3. Do you believe that the constitution is a fixed document which may be amended only according to its own specific written provisions? Or do you believe that it is a "living" document which must be construed and reconstrued by the courts and principally the United States Supreme Court to fit the changing demands of successive eras in our history?

Yes, the constitution is a fixed limitation on government powers, and it guarantees individual, inalienable rights to ALL, including pregnant women.

1. To restate your proposition is not to reason. But you know that or should. The word viable does not exist in the constitution in either the Fifth or the Fourteenth Amendments. The existing judicial usurpation of Roe vs. Wade and its progeny are not law, existing or otherwise, any more than Fidel Castro is the legitimate ruler of Cuba by virtue of imposing the rule of the knout and the gun. Roe set aside the laws and law-making powers of fifty states to impose the social policy preferences of the amoral and render moot one hundred fifty years or more of undisturbed legislation prohibiting most abortions in most states and all abortions in many of them. The states only ceded to the federal government limited powers and the powers ceded to the federal courts (see the Tenth Amendment) were much more sharply limited. I have no warrant to impose policy any more than you do but the states, under our constitution's Tenth Amendment do have theat warrant. You simply like the imposed regime of Roe vs. Wade and I do not. The question is constitutionality not my preferences or thine.

2. and 3. You have not answered and merit no reply.

Yes, the constitution is a fixed limitation on government powers, and it guarantees individual, inalienable rights to ALL, including pregnant women.

AND including the unborn.

"Months of gestation are necessary before a viable human being, with individual rights exists."

I am curious. Exactly at which point during the gestation process does an unborn child become endowed with rights?