Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
You're not quite correct. In the majority opinion of Roe v. Wade the court argued that there was a balance between the rights of the mother and "the interests of the state" in securing the wellfare of the developing child. They reasoned that early in pregnancy this interest was not as "compelling" as it was later in the preganacy and so the rights of the mother outweighed those of the fetus. There was no denial of the humanity of the fetus at all.
You're not quite correct. In the majority opinion of Roe v. Wade the court argued that there was a balance between the rights of the mother and "the interests of the state" in securing the wellfare of the developing child. They reasoned that early in pregnancy this interest was not as "compelling" as it was later in the preganacy and so the rights of the mother outweighed those of the fetus. There was no denial of the humanity of the fetus at all.
Comment