I have to say what is in my heart about the killing of a womans unborn child. The term 'Unborn' implys that the child has not entered life as we know it. It however does not mean that there is no life in the body of the child while it is still within the mother. I say that the court was wrong when it sided with the first mother wanting to murder her child. Yes I said it, Murder. The courts want respect but they stoop so low. Maybe we should stop doctor assested abortions and just give every female a wire hanger as soon as she is desiring sex. Abortion manes about as much sence as the term of 'Women and children first' when a ship is sinking. If you have a woman that is unable to give birth for any number of reasons, why should she be allowed to leave a sinking ship before some young man that maybe has a wife on shore that is exspecting to deliver his first or mayybe his only child. Why should he have to give up his chance of seeing his child? I see no reason for the old lady to have her life saved if she is of no use to mankind any longer.

He's right, the constitution dosen't say anything about the right of a woman to end her pregnacy, to end the life of an unborn child. The Constitution does mention much about the right to privacy but is the termation of an unborn child, the act itself involes another, an act of privacy? What the Roe v Wade desicion did was to dehumanize the fetus, fetus being latin for "unborn child," declareing that viblity, and later 24 weeks after fertilization being the time of humanization of personhood of a fetus, and therefore saying that abortion was constituinal before 24 weeks, that it refered to privacy, just a woman with something that may one day become human, and when that day comes the right to privacy becomes secondary, no one may end the life of another in the name of privacy, the act itself involes another human being and therefore there is a level of privacy but that privacy has its limits and those limits are the life and health of others. The states may set laws aganst abortion later in pregnacy but these are quickly being taken away. In some states the time of humanization of a fetus, the time when the child may be concidered a person, occurs with it's first breath of fresh air outside the mother womb. They are for the partial birth abortion of a child at 34 weeks but will openly weep over a struggeling child born prematurely at 21. In 1936 the German Supreme Court declared that Jews were not persons in the legal sense, this legalized the Holocaust in very much the same way abortion has been legalized in the United States, in very much the same way most genocieds, massacures and injustices have been justified throughout history. If you simply take away to human aspect of any victim the doors are wide open. The Supreme Court was in no place to put a "person" difination on when human life begins. Personhood is not a scinetific term, instead it is phlosopical or even religous. Scientificaly, life, human beings, begin at conception. During a congressinal inquiry of when life began, it being a very important legal question that need to be answered, 7 out of 8 experts asked stated life began at conception. But when does personhood begin. Well, depending on your point of view it can begian at any time and for any reason. In a tribal South American socitey(i forget its name) personhood dose not begain untill the age of 18 or 19, children are not concidered persons. And with somepeople in the United States, personhood dose not begin until there is a sense of self present, this would mean that no one is a person until 18 months after birth, 18 months being the generaly agreed upon time when a child has a mature sense of self in the same way adults have. All of this goes along with the concept of mental perfection, the ablity to think in abstract, complex ways, indeed a mental awarness of ones self and enviroment. This would mean of course that personhood is something that must be achived, that an infant who is developing a mature concept of the world is less of a person than an adult with his or her mature concept, or perhaps a teenager is almost a person but they are still developing emotionaly and mentaly and are there for lacking some human charteristics that or posessed by mature adults. And perhaps those with Down's Syndrom ,or are mentaly disabled in some way, can never be truely human, and perhaps those who were normal but have developed Alzhimerzs or MS have lost there personhood, or are less human than before. By Science human life begains at conception and therefore we are human beings at conception and persons, not the law delacares us persons and then human beings at a convenute time. The Constution says that no one shall be denied life liberty or property and life with out due process, and Abortion undoubtalby takes away the right to life of the unborn and with it all of our rights, what do we have if not the right to life, all rights have been comprmised if life has been comprmised. Is there any loss greater than the loss of life?