Originally Posted by PaleRider

I would imagine from their writings and desire to get to the truth of any matter they explored, had they known then what we know today with regard to developmental biology, thier writings would be quite different.

Of course the placenta exists. It belongs to the child.

And I am denying none of those things. I am saying, however, that because you reside inside of a thing, or depend upon a thing (even for your very life) you are not necessarily a part of that thing. If you want to claim that the child is a part of its mother's body, then you are going to need to substantiate that claim with some credible science.

As far as constitutionality goes, your rights end at the point you become a real and present danger to someone else.