Next, let's address the other mistake you're making. Roe V. Wade is a legal distinction that lays no claim to natural humans. According to the Supreme Court, fetuses are natural persons but not legal ones.

In other words, while they exist as natural persons, the court can't realistically grant them the Constitutional protections the United States offers.

Billions of people share this with fetuses, and they're people living outside United States jurisdiction.

The reason fetuses can't be granted legal rights (as legal persons) is because, well, how the hell are we going to give a fetus the right to guns? How are we going to give a fetus the right to a fair trial if a pregnant mother goes to jail? How are we going to give a fetus the right to an attorney and a fair trial? How are we going to give a fetus the right to due process if the police stop the mother for doing something illegal, but the fetus did nothing wrong?

Now you're beginning to see it.

It isn't until a baby is born that it becomes a separate legal entity. That doesn't mean the fetus doesn't exist, it just means that it's not recognized as being born and alive in the United States, and it doesn't yet have the protections of federal law.

The pro-life argument needs to clarify how it intends to grant all of these rights to the unborn if they propose the unborn are legal persons.