When Does Human Life Begin ???

Today I received an email from Senator Rand Paul. It stated the following:

When the Supreme Court handed down its now-infamous Roe v. Wade decision, it did so based on a new, previously undefined "right of privacy" which it "discovered" in so-called "emanations" of "penumbrae" of the Constitution. 

Of course, as constitutional law, it was a disaster. 

But never once did the Supreme Court declare abortion itself to be a constitutional right. 

Instead, the Supreme Court said: 

"We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins ... the judiciary at this point in the development of man's knowledge is not in a position to speculate as to the answer." 

Then the High Court made a key admission: 

"If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case [i.e., "Roe" who sought an abortion], of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment." 

The fact is, the 14th Amendment couldn't be clearer: 

"... nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law." 

Furthermore, the 14th Amendment says: 

"Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article." 

That's exactly what a Life at Conception Act would do.

********

It's an interesting argument, but it fails to address an important issue. Here is the full wording of that part of the 14th Amendment [emphasis added]:

1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

"All persons born or naturalized" - doesn't that imply that life begins when a person is BORN? If so that would invalidate his entire argument, since it means the constitution itself resolves the issue. My prediction is that any "Life at Conception Act" would be challenged on that grounds and overturned.

By the way, doesn't it seem like the Republican Party has a death wish? They elect an EXTREMELY unpopular president, and they continue to fight each and every thing that the majority of the population wants. They better hurry up and pass whatever legislation they can, because after the 2018 elections it is quite likely they will be toast.