18th June 2010, 8:25 PM
The dispute over whether or not an unborn fetus has rights mostly revolves around a technicality in the preamble to the Constitution regarding who is protected, which is any person born in the United States as well as legal immigrants, tourists, blah blah blah, etc. This is then countered by an argument of letter of the law vs. spirit of the law, that the pro-choice argument focuses too much on specific wording to the point that it's drawing interpretations that the Founding Fathers and framers of the Constitution never would have intended rather than using common sense to determine that yes, fetuses are living human beings with the same inalienable right to life as every born person.
'Tis a messy business, but regardless of each individual's or group's personal feelings, the Supreme Court ruled in Roe vs. Wade exactly the argument that Sacred Jellybean gave: that the government has no right to interfere with a woman's right to do with her body as she pleases, including her right to have an abortion.
'Tis a messy business, but regardless of each individual's or group's personal feelings, the Supreme Court ruled in Roe vs. Wade exactly the argument that Sacred Jellybean gave: that the government has no right to interfere with a woman's right to do with her body as she pleases, including her right to have an abortion.