Count the number of times the word "born" appears in the Constitution compared to the number of times "conceived"-- in reference to the conception of a child-- appears. While I disagree with this on a moral-- and ideological-- level, citizenship and human rights are attached to the human being only upon its birth.
Fact of the matter is
the number of times it occurs does not anywhere near approximate the proper specificity as to meaning nor significance that you are imputing to these occurences, that you seem to be asserting, which I will quote again because sangha said, and you are defending this line of thought, that "
Under the constitution, a human is not a "person" until it is born." Our Constitution does not say that, you can extrapolate about that all day and night, you just might, being mighty fragile as the Constitution says nothing of the sort to that effect, and certainly does not confirm that at all …
anywhere... Number of times mentioned does add, but not much, not in a way that gives any true credence, gives no specific bearing to how important or not creation or our conception may, or may not, be.
However, just for fun, lets go down this little jog...
Would you consider the Declaration of Independence a founding document in our common history of the United States?
Even if you do not, I would, and I think most of us Americans would. Additionally, just coincidentally, fortuitously, I would assert the D.O.I. IS the document at the very CONCEPTION of these great states unified against a common foe and declaring itself not only alive, even though not yet recognized, not yet quite birthed shall we say, yet quickly growing, developing. Our brains, our heart, our muscle, sinew, souls and the spirit to survive developing as rapidly as we plausibly could… with the mother country attempting to snuff out our very existence. This Revolutionary War the labor which which we toiled to achieve that victory, for all intents and purposes the culmination of which was the recognized birth of our nation, totally set aside, bands broken, umbilical snipped, on our own.
With that creating, the Declaration started the joining of all these different parts, beginning to work as one, not yet free from the mother country... but desiring our life, our independence.
By maybe an even greater quirk of circumstance, or maybe not as those founding fathers thought of just about everything, but by happenstance here in this, the conceiving document, the D.O.I. mentions all men [ meaning of course all mankind] are, guess what…
created, notice the “
created” not that pesky word “
born” being referenced here, undeniably importantly, that
all men are created equal. We know Jefferson did not just bandy words, especially not with oversight in draft from the likes of Franklin and Adams, no slouches themselves in skills of word-crafting, Jefferson was very economical and efficient with his verbiage.
The problem is that the power to "protect the unborn" violates the 13th Amendment, because the unborn only exist through the labor of their biological mothers.
Well, I would have to say the 13th does not obviate the more primary right, the right to life of an innocent. While we can argue it for months no doubt, I will say this succinctly. Except in 1% of the cases that actually end up in pregnancy, these the cases of rape and incest, in all the rest of the 99% the females have knowingly and willingly agreed [ past tense] to engage in a potential of creating another human that has now, in actuality, in fact, occurred. Now the time for choice, except in that 1%, has come and gone. Now the right of life trumps, if it did not already, the lesser “right” of choice, which in any case already terminated.
Sorry. Actually, not really sorry at all. Too many lost lives forever on that side of the divide for this side to ever be sorry for fighting to protect the most innocent, the most helpless and the totally voiceless.
Its not slavery if one willingly volunteers, binds by contract sealed with performance, cannot back out once the contract is a done deal, separate DNA being proof positive of agreement in 99% of the cases, better than signatures and within nano-breadth as good as fingerprints between the two parties involved.