So here we go. At last you have dropped all pretense of rational argument and have jumped headlong into emotionalism.
When a clash of rights exists between individuals, the rights of one must always give way to the more fundamental right of the other. That is simply how our legal system works whether you like it or not. I don't know how many times I have posted the words from the roe decision itself that acknowledge this fact of our system, but I will post them again so that you can see that your argument carries no weight at all.
"The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a "person" within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well-known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment. The appellant conceded as much on reargument. On the other hand, the appellee conceded on reargument that no case could be cited that holds that a fetus is a person within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. "
No less than the supreme court itself has answered your question. Yes, the child's right to live takes precedence over any right that a woman may invoke except the right to self defense should her life be in imminent danger. The lack of cases noted in the second highlight no longer exists. There is a large, and growing body of case law that does answer the question of the personhood of the unborn. The simple fact is that both science and the law have caught up with roe and the handwriting that Justice Blackmun saw on the wall when he wrote the majority decision way back when has come to pass.
This is a simple matter of science and the law. Even if science weren't settled on the issue, the law is. There is undeniable and irrefutable case law today that holds that the unborn are persons within not only the law, but the meaning of the 14th amendment. There are people in prison today who are there having been found guilty separately and specifically of both murder and manslaughter in the death of an unborn child. In th is country, you can't even be charged, much less tried, convicted, and sentenced for any sort of homicide unless you have, in fact, killed a person.
