The Due Process Clauses state, “....nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law....”, and “[N]or shall any person ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ....”
People who support abortion on the grounds of liberty think that “by restricting the right to terminate pregnancies, the State conscripts women’s bodies into its service, forcing women to continue their pregnancies, suffer the pains of childbirth, and in most instances, provide years of maternal care.” (1) In Roe v. Wade, “the Court ruled that a right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees a woman’s right to an abortion.” (2) The Heritage Foundation labels the infamous case an activist one because, “the Supreme Court relies upon notions of living constitutionalism, ... to create a right that is nowhere to be found in the text of the Constitution.” The Due Process Clause was meant to protect newly freed slaves from mistreatment by state governments; the Supreme Court ignored the text’s original intent.
Michael Paulsen, a leading constitutional scholar, criticizes the Court’s abortion rulings, saying they, “created an essentially unqualified constitutional right of pregnant women to abortion.”
Pro-choicers’ reasoning on this clause is hardly consistent with the principles America’s founders espoused. James Madison, who is frequently called the "Father of the Constitution," described the federal government’s delegated constitutional powers as, “few and defined.” It seems ludicrous to paint the Founders as pro-abortion.
The other argument involves the Equal Protection Clause, which states that “No State shall...deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Some people think that assuming that motherhood is natural for women is sexist. They feel that denying women the option of abortion is discriminatory because it prevents women from living equally in society. Pro-choicers’ reasoning dictates that letting women kill their children will allow them to lead equal, self-determining lives. This argument is intensely hypocritical: a pregnant woman who aborts her baby ignores that unborn babies’ rights and prevents him or her from determining his or her own life.
Paulsen disagrees that abortion restriction discriminates against women, saying, “abortion restrictions do not restrict acts of women because they are women; they restrict acts committed by men or women because they kill human fetuses. ... ask a ‘pro-choice’ ‘feminist’ whether abortion should be permitted for reasons of sex-selection--that is, because the unborn child is a girl—and the sex discrimination argument begins to turn back on itself.” (3)
Another way to ensure equality was the rejection of “spousal notification provision.” In other words, a woman didn’t have to inform her husband ahead of time that she was having an abortion, because that was considered to be, “reminiscent of the common law’s enforcement of a hierarchical relationship between husband and wife.”
The Equal Protection Clause’s intention, “was to require states to provide the same treatment for whites and freed slaves in regard to the class of personhood and citizenship rights enumerated in the Civil Rights Act of 1866.” (4) Consequently, this clause is not applicable, and abortion advocates must resort to designating unborn babies as clumps of tissue that don’t deserve human rights.
In summary, the aforementioned constitutional arguments for abortion do not stand up under the slightest scrutiny. There is no right to abortion in America. Distortion of the Constitution’s text has led to court-approved carnage.
- “Equality Arguments for Abortion Rights.” Neil S. Seigel and Reva B. Siegel.<http://uclalawreview.com.org/the-equality-argument-for-abortion-rights/>
- “Roe v. Wade.” <http://www.heritage.org/initiatives/rule-of-law/judicial-activism/cases/roe-v-wade>
- “The Unbearable Wrongness of Roe.” Jan. 23, 2012. Michael Stokes Paulsen.<http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/01/4577/>
- “Equal Protection.” David Smolin. The Heritage Guide to the Constitution. <http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/amendments/14/essays/171/equal-protection>