I don’t know why you keep confusing the constitution and rights. But since you do, I don’t see how a rational discussion is possible.
>>>>>Of course, now I'm confused as to what Fred's position is.
You always seem somewhat confused. And you're perpetual rants lead me to believe, you're out to confuse the world. LOL
>>>>>That is incorrect. I understand and respect the Constitution. Our disagreement is on whether the preborn is a person.
Sorry. You haven't convinced me yet. Like you said. The Founders did not have the knowledge we have today. You can't read something into the Constitution that isn't there. That is called Constitutional activism and the reason why we have Roe v Wade today. In the days of the Founders, a fetus didn't have any rights and with few exceptions, the fetus still has little protection under law. The unborn fetus definitely doesn't have the rights accorded a born person.
Thats why like Reagan, I support a HLA added to the Constitution that would protect the unborn. Even though it remains a long shot.
>>>>>This is an argument about what is right, not about what the constitution says.
In your mind. That is why the Constitution has such little meaning to you. You don't have enough respect to even capitalize it. Freudian slip?