Roe v. Wade (1972) was about a woman who sought an abortion in a state that outlawed abortions. But before the U.S. Supreme Court heard her case she gave birth to the child and adopted it out.

  So the issue before the court was really moot. But seven out of nine old men decided to legislate, and in a very confusing decision held  that all women had a constitutional privacy right to abort a fetus/child in the first trimester (although there is no such privacy right listed in the Constitution). They reasoned that it was no more harmful to the woman in the first trimester to abort than to carry the child to full birth.

  So, except for limiting abortions to the first trimester, they gave the child growing in the womb no consideration whatsoever. Later, in 1989 (Webster v. Reproduction Health) the court recognized that the states had some interest in regulating some abortion cases. Then in 1992, the Court in Planned Parenthood v. Casey  amended the Roe v. Wade limitation on abortion from the first trimester to fetal viability, i.e., whether the child could live outside the womb (which by the way PP has often ignored) thus recognizing that the fetus/child is, at sometime while still in the mothers womb, a live body separate form the mothers.

What our Supreme Court has failed to recognize is that the fetus/child in the mother’s womb has been alive ever since its conception, as evidenced by its growth from the moment of its beginning (only a live body grows).

  As a live body it too has the constitutional right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness whether it’s in the womb or out, and its a violation of our Constitution and every sense of human morality to take that life by means of an abortion.

Jerry Votendahl  

 Litchfield Park, Arizona

Recommended for you