Supreme Court offers definition of 'person'

There is always much discussion about the Supreme Court's finding a right to privacy in the Constitution creating a right to abortion, but almost never do you hear a discussion about the Supreme Court declaring that unborn children are not persons, and therefore, do not have the Constitutional protection of the right to life.In the Roe v. Wade decision, the court wrote that since the Constitution did not specifically say that the unborn are persons, they find that the unborn are not persons and do not have the right to life.In 1973, the Supreme Court justices gave themselves the power to decide who is and who is not a person. Since the Constitution does not define "person" anywhere, the court said it would do it. Whoever it decides is not a person does not have the right to life.That non-person can be killed for being inconvenient, unwanted, a burden, or any other reason. The court need only declare, as it did in Roe, "that the word 'person,' as used in the 14th Amendment, does not include _____."This is the abortion discussion America needs to have. We should be asking why the Supreme Court has been allowed to give itself the power to decide the personhood of any human being. And if We the People don't take that power away from them, who will be the next group of inconvenient people to be declared non-persons with no right to live?