(Quoting the 14th Amendment)nor shall any State deprive any person of life...without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
I don't see any of these children receiving their equal protection.
Let's say a person is forced against their will to be chained to you. Do you have the right to kill them?
Or, how about we take a trip to the not-so-distant past: These children cannot speak up for themselves, literally. Historically speaking, though they could certainly try literally, people denied civil rights legally could not speak up for themselves in almost every case. Tell me, what side of history do people tend to be on when denying civil rights to people who cannot defend themselves? Consider, for example, the historical south. They were the holdouts over slavery, long after others recognized that your race does not make you any less of a human. Slaveowners asserted they had rights to their slaves, that their slaves had no rights, and ensured that their slaves could not speak up without fear of punishment. One civil war and 13th amendment later, and Jim Crow started. Same thing, except on paper non-whites had some rights that southern states chose to completely ignore anyway.
The only difference now is that those being denied their civil rights physically can't even tell someone their rights are being violated instead of simply being at great risk to do so. The parallels to the racist south do not stack up in favor of the pro-choice movement. At this point I'm just waiting for a national act or constitutional amendment formally protecting unborn rights to complete this part of the story, and protecting the post-born is the next domino in the life movement anyway, much like a paper acceptance of civil rights was the first domino to full civil rights. Much like the pro-desegregation generation is already virtually gone, the solely pro-birth generation is already fading away.
At the end of the day, abortion is a conflict of rights: the mother's right to space and autonomy and the child's right to life. Neither should be infringed, but one has to. You have made it clear whose rights you see as greater, I disagree with that assessment. Citing people who simply assert that these children in fact do not have these civil rights is not going to change this.