The Fetal Right to Life Argument: Roe v. Wade (1973) is probably the most important Supreme Court case in the last fifty years. It has divided the nation on moral issues and it continues to be a lightning rod in political debate. In it, the Supreme Court held that a fetus has no right to life and is not a “person” within the meaning of the Constitution. This part of Roe v. Wade was a colossal error, an abuse of judicial power, and an act of social activism. The egregious flaws in Roe can be corrected with a fetal right to life Amendment to the Constitution.

Roe v. Wade is a complex case that established a woman’s right to privacy and a right to control her own body, which was good. But the Supreme Court also held that a fetus has no right to life and is not a “person” under the Constitution. That latter finding was a colossal error, an abuse of power, and an act of social activism.

The egregious flaws in Roe can be corrected with a fetal right to life amendment to the Constitution. Although Congress has not seriously entertained this in forty years, it would still be the right thing to do. Restoring the fetal right to life would require weighing the right to an abortion against the fetal right to life.

We should never forget that Roe was a moral travesty that established a reprehensible and barbaric practice of killing defenseless human beings. We should acknowledge the flawed legal rationale used by the Court, and correct the problem. The good parts of Roe do not have to come at the expense of the fetal right to life.

In the following video, Paul Smith talks about his book, “The Fetal Right to Life Argument,” in The Dr. Ward Bond Show. They discuss several Supreme Court cases and the balancing of a woman’s right to control her body with the unborn baby’s right to life. Paul gives his insights on both legal and moral standpoints of the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize abortion.