ROE v. WADE UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

The Ramifications of Non-Personhood

An interesting question to consider is whether or not the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade is itself unconstitutional in that it denies to the class of unborn persons "equal protection" of the law. In fact, it goes beyond this and denies them even the unequal protection that they formerly enjoyed under the anti-abortion statutes of the various States. (Those statutes had treated abortion as criminal and thus had given pre-natal human life some protection but did not regard the offense as being as serious as other homicides and thus never gave the unborn child as much protection as was given to other humans.) The decisions in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Boulton removed from the unborn any protection of the law and did so through the intellectually dishonest expedient of defining them as non-persons within the meaning of the Constitution. Although the equal protection clause applies directly only to the States, the basic concept is made applicable to the federal government under the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.