[HumanaeVitae]

and your philosophy would leave you utterly without a counterargument.

Except for the part where I stated that all people are equal before the law because of their intrinsic worth.

You sound a lot smarter than you really are steve.

[steve-b]

Nope; if you start from the position that the only right is a right to life then you are forced to defend any social order, no matter how repressive by any other standard, that keeps order. Having claimed that all else is a mere privilege, then you're stuck with the logical implications of that position, and will be repeatedly reminded of them until you admit that your premise doesn't work.

[steve-b]

Except for the part where I stated that all people are equal before the law because of their intrinsic worth.

On the contrary, in your statement that you would allow speech that did not offend you and prohibit that which did, you expressly rejected any notion of equality before the law.