As to your first point: you’re begging the question by presupposing that there is a “right” to kill and extract a fetus under various circumstances. Where does that right originate, and who gets to decide what those circumstances are?
Liberals tend to believe that the constitution is a living document and can protect rights even when those rights didn’t exist at the time of the founding. Even if you accept that, you’re only halfway there. The right must still come from somewhere. Where does the right to an abortion, as defined by Roe—which conceives of a right to an abortion all the way to the point of viability—come from? If you can’t find it in the text of the Constitution, and you can’t find it in the history books of what rights the framers thoughts were fundamental, it has to derive from broad public recognition, correct?
Going to your second point—the right protected by Roe is very different than the version of abortion that has broad public support. Roe invalidates any law that bans abortion generally before viability (22-24 weeks), even if the law has exceptions for health of mother, etc.
That, however, is a much broader right than either Americans or most people in the rest of the developed world support. Support for “generally legal” abortion falls off a cliff after the first trimester: https://news.gallup.com/poll/235469/trimesters-key-abortion-.... Just 28% of people think abortion should be “generally legal” in the second trimester. There is a biological basis for why any parent who has had a 12-week anatomy scan might think that should be an upper limit on elective abortion: https://www.parents.com/pregnancy/week-by-week/12/your-growi.... Not surprisingly, in Europe, 10-14 weeks is a very common time limit for elective abortions. Under Roe, the abortion laws of France and Denmark would be unconstitutional. This is not a theoretical issue: 1 in 10 US abortions happen after 13 weeks, and birth defects are not common enough to explain most of them.
So where does Roe come from, even within a liberal theory of what’s protected by the constitution?
> As to your first point: you’re begging the question by presupposing that there is a “right” to kill and extract a fetus under various circumstances.
And you're presupposing that a nonviable fetus is alive.
As I understand it, the conservative view is that rights are not granted by the government, they are only restricted, hence the 10th amendment. The right to freedom of movement is not granted to me by anyone, yet I have it because it is not explicitly restricted. The constitution puts guardrails on when, and how, the government is allowed to restrict my rights.
> Liberals tend to believe that the constitution is a living document and can protect rights even when those rights didn’t exist at the time of the founding.
This depends on right in question. For example the right to donate to political candidates is not explicitly enumerated in the constitution (and is heavily restricted in many other nations), but is seen as protected via a combination of rights enumerated in the 1st amendment.
> If you can’t find it in the text of the Constitution, and you can’t find it in the history books of what rights the framers thoughts were fundamental, it has to derive from broad public recognition, correct?
No, I refer you again to Brown v. BoE. There was at the time no broad public recognition that Separate but Equal wasn't constitutional, and the people who wrote the amendment certainly felt segregation was A-OK.
> Where does the right to an abortion, as defined by Roe
As I understand, in this case the Justices found that an individual's right to privacy prevented the government from meddling with the medical procedures that person chose to get, without. But then you knew that already. It appears that you disagree with this, even though 15 (and a half) Supreme court justices have found that the text of the constitution supports this protection. (notably compared to 8, likely soon 9, who did not)
Liberals tend to believe that the constitution is a living document and can protect rights even when those rights didn’t exist at the time of the founding. Even if you accept that, you’re only halfway there. The right must still come from somewhere. Where does the right to an abortion, as defined by Roe—which conceives of a right to an abortion all the way to the point of viability—come from? If you can’t find it in the text of the Constitution, and you can’t find it in the history books of what rights the framers thoughts were fundamental, it has to derive from broad public recognition, correct?
Going to your second point—the right protected by Roe is very different than the version of abortion that has broad public support. Roe invalidates any law that bans abortion generally before viability (22-24 weeks), even if the law has exceptions for health of mother, etc.
That, however, is a much broader right than either Americans or most people in the rest of the developed world support. Support for “generally legal” abortion falls off a cliff after the first trimester: https://news.gallup.com/poll/235469/trimesters-key-abortion-.... Just 28% of people think abortion should be “generally legal” in the second trimester. There is a biological basis for why any parent who has had a 12-week anatomy scan might think that should be an upper limit on elective abortion: https://www.parents.com/pregnancy/week-by-week/12/your-growi.... Not surprisingly, in Europe, 10-14 weeks is a very common time limit for elective abortions. Under Roe, the abortion laws of France and Denmark would be unconstitutional. This is not a theoretical issue: 1 in 10 US abortions happen after 13 weeks, and birth defects are not common enough to explain most of them.
So where does Roe come from, even within a liberal theory of what’s protected by the constitution?