By Cal Thomas, in World Magazine:
What makes the ruling and the march ironic is that the 1973 court, in essence, downgraded a human fetus to the level of nonperson, while the modern court has invested “personhood” in corporations. Does anyone else see a contradiction or at least a moral inconsistency in these two rulings?
I hadn’t really thought of this inconsistency. While I’m not sure it really is a new inconsistency, it is inconsistent. Why ascribe rights to corporations as legal persons while denying rights to the unborn, who are actual persons?
Brandon Markette 