@HP No…you don’t get to try wiggling out of that. You stated ” Those amendments were supposed to grant black folks the full rights to citizenship, just as Roe was to guarantee any woman the choice to have an abortion. ” I pointed out to you that the Constitution is rife with reasons why race should not be a consideration for citizenship. I then challenged you to show me where abortion was guaranteed by the Constitution. YOU conflated citizenship and abortion as the same thing. You THEN stated “I look forward to your explanation of abortion as a citizenship issue.” I never even hinted at that. The exact opposite as a matter of fact. I pointed out to you that they were not related, yet you persist. And now you want to say I am the one that put them together. I didn’t. I think the crux of the issue is the word “conflate”.
conflate
kən-flāt′
transitive verb
To bring together; meld or fuse.
To combine (two variant texts, for example) into one whole.
To blow together; to bring together; to collect; to fuse together; to join or weld; to consolidate.
You are the one that tied them together. You claimed Constitutional Amendments that granted citizenship to blacks also granted abortions to women. THAT is the crux of the issue. Abortion is not mentioned anywhere. Even when RvW was passed, the SCOTUS knew it was likely to be challenged as being unconstitutional and that it wouldn’t hold up to the challenges. If they had come out and claimed that a fetus was NOT a human being until some set point in the pregnancy or after delivery, they might have set a precedence that would hold up. But even then, as science progresses and babies can be born and be viable several months prior to expected date, the definition of when a fetus became a human would have been challenged and would have to have been altered.