I believe in pro choice concerning the matter of abortion. Privacy is something that we fought for and due process in the constitution of the united states and that should extend to the privacy of a woman having an unexpected or unwanted child. I don't believe that the government should try to control whether a woman is allowed to have an abortion, especially if the pregnancy was due to negative circumstances such as rape.
This question is somewhat difficult to answer. Is abortion consistent or inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution? I don't believe that the authors of the Constitution had abortion in their minds at any point during the drafting of the document, so I guess this is an open-ended question where people could argue anything. It isn't specifically forbidden by the Constitution that I know of, so I guess it is consistent by default.
A poor mother in a third world country who does manual labor for a living births a child. The infant is unresponsive and is immediately put on life support... It cannot breathe on it's own, and is not conscious. However it will be fine within the next 3 days.
The mother regrets her decision to have the child because in order to feed it she will need to harm her body by working longer hours which is just as physically demanding as being pregnant. Thus, raising the child will make her a slave and violate her bodily autonomy.
But the hospital will not kill the infant and they will not arrange for an adoption, so she smothers it to death.
Is her action morally wrong? Explain.
PS; you cannot say "yes, because birth makes a fetus become a person", that's an arbitrary statement. You have to explain HOW birth turns a fetus into a person.