Now that I think about it, a strong argument could be made that any state allowing abortion on demand as an elective medical procedure, is violating the 13th Amendment, because an unborn child must necessarily be reduced to property and the status of a slave prior to being medically killed.
The 13th Amendment is the only Amendment that completely prohibits a particular activity/institution [slavery], on the part of the federal government, state governments, and all private actors.
It is not possible to perform an abortion unless one begins by negating the rights of the unborn baby, who presumably would want to live and to be born. Effectively the unborn baby is reduced to the status of a slave and then it is permitted for the master, holding the power of life and death over this human property, to exercise the power to kill the slave.
The initial presumption should be made that the unborn baby wishes to live, and the mother of this unborn child should not have the right to negate the [presumed] desire to live on the part of the unborn baby.
"Well parents have a right to decide for their children" we may hear as a retort from those advocating abortion. Perhaps they will point out [correctly], "an unborn baby cannot communicate anything" which is true. Well, a 4 month old, 11 month old, and often an 18 month old, cannot communicate much of anything, shall we allow a mother who tires of her new-born baby to engage in an act of infanticide? A 4 year old is usually capable of fairly coherent speech but is unlikely to be able to provide a philosophically profound basis for why they should be allowed to continue to live, does this mean a parent can have a child put to death as a toddler if the toddler cannot give a graduate level thesis explanation on their desire to live and their right to life?
The presumption should exist that all unborn babies wish to live and the state, barring some dire medical threat to the mother, should enforce this presumption and protect the right of the unborn to ultimately be born.
