New Stanek poll: Is it fair to equate abortion with slavery?
I have a new poll question up:
Is it fair to equate abortion with slavery?
Virginia Democrats are attacking Attorney General and Republican gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli for comments he made last year connecting the two, this on the heels of Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser doing the same at CPAC.
Cuccinelli was spot on:
Over time, the truth demonstrates its own rightness, and its own righteousness. Our experience as a country has demonstrated that on one issue after another. Start right at the beginning, slavery. Today, abortion.
History has shown us what the right position was, and those were issues that were attacked by people of faith aggressively to change the course of this country. We need to fight for the respect for life, not just for life but for respect for life. One leads to the other.
As RH Reality Check’s Robin Marty fairly pointed out, “Maybe this language is somehow new to those who don’t pay much attention to the abortion issue. For those who do spend any time listening, this is rhetoric we’ve heard over and over again.”
But apparently Democrats are looking for fodder in anticipation of Terry McAuliffe’s run against Cuccinelli. IMO, it’s a place Democrats should rather not go, but ok. What do you think? Are the two issues related? Or not? Answer the poll at the bottom right side of the home page.
Our last poll question was a bit screwed up. So we’re rebooting.
As always, make comments to either the previous or current poll here, not on the Poll Daddy website.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
It is completely unfair. The owner of Dred Scott was demanding that the slave be returned to him, the owner. A female aborting is expelling the unborn from her body. The slave owner seeks to force someone else to work on the owner’s behalf. The aborter seeks to avoid “working” and “laboring” for the unborn.
It is perfectly legitimate to argue that nature has in some sense “enslaved” the human female to the unborn and that society has a right to ratify this enslavement. The greater good may require that human females be “drafted” into the service of the unborn. But the fact is that the female seeking to rid her body of a pregnancy is doing exactly the OPPOSITE of what a slave owner does.
The simple truth is that pregnancy is unique. It is normal but it is unique in that there is just nothing that is not pregnancy that is similar to pregnancy.
Fair. Personhood is the issue in both cases. Pretty much all there is to it.
The slave owner could do anything he wanted with his slaves. They were his property. He held life and death in his hands.
The pregnant woman can legally do anything she wants with her preborn child, which she views as her property when she decides it is her right to destroy that life. She holds life and death in her hands.
Slaves were dehumanized and treated as if they were not full persons – a substandard class. So are the preborn.
Society wondered what would happen if we freed the slaves. Where would they go? Who would care for them, employ them? Society makes the same argument with regards to the preborn. Who will care for these children if they’re born? Who will pay for them?
Both abortion and slavery are rooted in the idea that we can own someone else and determine their level of humanity according to whatever factors we prefer, so we can use them or dispose of them at will.
I’d say the comparison is more than fair.
Hello Denise,
What we mean is that Dred Scott was denied his basic rights as a human being and labeled as less than human. The unborn child is denied his/her basic rights and labeled as less than human. To expel the fetus he or she has to be killed (denied the basic right to life). They are both denied personhood. Please if you don’t listen to anything I am saying, be very, very careful and think of the consequences of the logic you just laid out, it is very dangerous. You could use that kind of logic to justify the death of any human being that is dependent on another (I know that is not what you meant, but be careful non the less)
Then, as now, the issue is a political/intellectual elite who do not see personhood as intrinsic to being human.
Then, as now, a predatory political class simply constructed an arbitrary and capricious set of criteria for what makes the class to be preyed upon not quite human. Having successfully defined the class to be preyed upon out of the human family, it becomes easy to pass laws and policies aimed at disenfranchising that population, always for perceived economic gain.
It was this way with:
Slavery, where slave labor enriched the slaveholders.
Segregation, which punished the former slaves for the disenfranchisement of their former masters.
Eugenic sterilization of the developmentally disabled, where Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. claimed that their care, “saps the strength of the state,” in the notorious Buck v. Bell decision.
The Nazi Holocaust, where Jews were stripped of their material wealth and exterminated. For years before the concentration camps, Jews were deprived of their political rights under the infamous Nuremb erg Laws.
Abortion, where babies are perceived as impeding the attainment of education and material goods (which is the primary reason given for wanting black girls to abort their babies).
So, yes, Ken Cuccinelli has it exactly right; but he should cite all of these other examples as well. At their root lies the denial of personhood status not being seen as intrinsic. To the proaborts who would disagree, let me ask you this:
Did the 13th Amendment make blacks persons, or recognize what was already there and what had been stolen?
Did Buck v. Bell violate the personhood status of the developmentally disabled?
Did bthe Nuremberg Trials give personhood status to the Jews after the fact, or were the Nazis hanged for violating that personhood status which was intrinsic to all humans?
How do your actions differ in principle from slave owners or Nazis?
Alice says:
March 24, 2013 at 3:34 pm
Fair. Personhood is the issue in both cases. Pretty much all there is to it.
(Denise) No. In order to criminalize abortion, the unborn must have superior rights to the born. No one who is born as a legal right to anyone else’s body. It is entirely arguable that the human female is obligated to serve the unborn but that is completely different than the slavery issue. The slave owner wants the service of the slave. The aborter is refusing her services to the unborn.
I have a close friend who recently donated his kidney to save the life of his father. I very strongly respect him for sacrificing his body in this manner. Yes, it has been argued that the human female is obligated to allow the embryo or fetus to grow in her womb because it is for someone else. It is also true that if my friend had refused, he would hardly be comparable to a slave owner even if his Dad had died.
Pregnancy is unique. You have to argue on grounds specific to it. No one is ever going to see some desperate, panicked teen girl who has been viciously raped and can’t stand carrying to term as a result as similar to a slave owner. In much more “normal” cases, people aren’t going to see women who for whatever reason just aren’t up to carrying to term as similar to slave owners.
This analogy should be dropped.
In order to criminalize abortion, the unborn must have superior rights to the born. No one who is born as a legal right to anyone else’s body. It is entirely arguable that the human female is obligated to serve the unborn but that is completely different than the slavery issue. The slave owner wants the service of the slave. The aborter is refusing her services to the unborn.
Good night, finally you admit out loud you are pro-abortion. It took you long enough. At least I am now spared the embarrassment of having someone on my side who wants to put contraceptives in public water supplies.
No, I will not drop the analogy to appease you. Nor does recognizing the right of a child to live rob the mother of any right she ordinarily possesses. Pregnant women can own property, earn money, attend school, drive, buy food, get married, get divorced, etc., etc., etc. The only thing they can’t do is hire someone to kill their child. Which people don’t have a right to do even when they aren’t pregnant. Analogy is apt, I’m not going to not use it just because you don’t want me to.
Alice says:
March 24, 2013 at 4:08 pm
In order to criminalize abortion, the unborn must have superior rights to the born. No one who is born as a legal right to anyone else’s body. It is entirely arguable that the human female is obligated to serve the unborn but that is completely different than the slavery issue. The slave owner wants the service of the slave. The aborter is refusing her services to the unborn. Good night, finally you admit out loud you are pro-abortion. It took you long enough.
(Denise) I am not pro-abortion. I am pointing out the fallacy of this analogy. The fact is that aborters are in not at all similar to slave owners. I am horrified by abortion.
<<At least I am now spared the embarrassment of having someone on my side who wants to put contraceptives in public water supplies.
(Denise) This whole thing was to a large extent a fantasy. It was based on the fact that people often tend to be sloppy and forgetful. Therefore, in order to prevent abortion, I wanted to render women temporarily sterile so they would have to take active steps to become fertile. The resulting pregnancies would be cherished and valued. That was the whole point. Yes, it might not work in practice if the contraceptives harmed other people such as men and children.
Denise,
Why not worry about what is between your own legs and respect the human rights of the rest of the population. The Savior of the world came 2,000 years ago, so your services are not necessary.
Gerard Nadal says:
March 24, 2013 at 4:35 pm
Denise, Why not worry about what is between your own legs and respect the human rights of the rest of the population.
(Denise) I did everything I could to prevent a pregnancy during the time I was fertile. Again, the whole contraceptives in the water supply was basically a fantasy. It just seems to me that if fertile women were rendered temporarily sterile and were required to do something active in order to become fertile, it is likely the resulting pregnancies would be off to a good start.
I’m middle-aged and no longer super-sexy. That part of my life is basically past.
As some have well stated, it’s the same disgusting thinking that is responsible for both …
Dehumanizing one group to supposedly solve the problems of another group.
Sure there are differences, Denise – one is slavery, one is abortion. We get that part. The analogy is very useful. Framing abortion in terms of human rights is highly appealing to a diversity of people.
The analogy is fair, for the many good reasons mentioned here, and to which I have nothing to add.
“In order to criminalize abortion, the unborn must have superior rights to the born.”
No, Denise, they must “only” have equal rights, just as was the case with the freeing of the slaves. The once enslaved blacks were not given superior rights.
“No one who is born as a legal right to anyone else’s body.”
Really? Women have the right to do whatever they want with the “bodies”, the lives, growing in their wombs.
Women in the USA were not enslaved to their unborn children before Roe v Wade. Motherhood is not slavery. Women, and the human race, have done fine with motherhood and children since the beginning of the human race.
Denise,
The sexiest women in the world are the ones men find irresistible after the sex is over. Their sexiness, their irresistibility come from their generous and loving hearts, hearts that are generous and loving toward all life. Their countenance is a far cry from the women who are merely “hot”.
Don’t worry about how time has layed up your youthful visage. Women with loving hearts look more beautiful with every passing year, and it truly shows on their faces and in their eyes. Claim that today, Denise. Begin by renouncing the parsimoniousness of your heart in the past and give that heart over to Jesus today.
Today!
Ask Him to make you a new woman, and He will. Then tell me if you don’t discover a beauty that far surpasses any you thought that you had.
@ Gerard Nadal:
I’m not upset over the loss of my youthful attractiveness. Heck, a few years ago, when I was 47, a man in a car indicated he wanted to talk to me. I went over to him. He looked to be about 25 with the sort of appearance usually seen on Maxim or GQ. He brightly asked, “How much?”
I replied, “You’ve got the wrong idea — definitely the wrong idea.” He said, “I’m sorry.” It was rather odd since I was fetchingly decked out in a t-shirt, loose-fitting jeans, old sneakers, and no make-up.
At any rate, if the position of Denise Noe’s boyfriend was open, I have a close friend who is attractive and 39 and he has told me that if nominated for that position, he would run, and if elected, he would serve.
My husband was orthodox Jewish and he couldn’t believe that Jewish people could be in favor of abortion ..his own sister has had at least 3 that he was aware of. He said after the holocaust he didn’t believe that “that many” Jews would be in favor of abortion. I told him “unfortunately honey they are.”…anyway he was pro life and semantics were used to kill the Jews and semantics are used to kill the unborn.
Slavery n abortion yep it equates. In both cases a people are subhuman.
The fact is that pregnancy is not easy. Pregnancy imposes physical and emotional costs on the pregnant female. It can be very painful and has dangers.
As I’ve pointed out before, perhaps we getting wrong answers because we’re asking the wrong question. Given the discomforts, dangers, and intrinsic biological costs of pregnancy, the question should not be: why do women have abortions?
It should be: Why do women carry pregnancies to term?
Why do women allow themselves to go through this dangerous and painful experience?
The answer is that they want to have babies.
Thus, we need to ensure that the women who get pregnant are those who want to have babies because the desire for a baby will lead her to endure the intrinsic costs of pregnancy.
If the question is if it’s fair to equate slavery and abortion, then yeah. It’s a fair analogy. I personally think it’s as effective as the Holocaust analogy, which is to say not that effective at all. But to each their own, it certainly has parallels and is fair to use.
Does anyone actually see a raped woman who cannot stand to carry the result of a vicious attack to term as similar to the slave owner who demands a slave be returned to make use of that person’s labor?
Again: I am horrified by abortion. I believe the only women who get pregnant should be those who yearn for babies and look forward to having them.
“Does anyone actually see a raped woman who cannot stand to carry the result of a vicious attack to term as similar to the slave owner who demands a slave be returned to make use of that person’s labor?”
No. It seems to me that people who make the slavery analogy aren’t aiming it at women who abort, but rather society that dehumanizes human fetuses.
But yeah, that’s why I’m not fond of the analogy and don’t think it’s effective, it seems to demonize women who abort if not used carefully.
It could be said to be fair. The only problem is they’ve got it all wrong. The comparison is between slavery and the bondage of women perpetrated by a patriarchal structure. A series of changes, including Roe v Wade, are part of the continuing journey from this bondage for women.
“The sexiest women in the world are the ones men find irresistible after the sex is over.” – hey Gerard, something we agree on!!! Goodness me. This does apply to pro-choice women too of course.
Hi Jack. I hope things are better for you. Sometimes it takes timee. I respect your wishes to leave it at that. Anyway I had gotten a great book from the library about abortion and the holocaust …wish i could recall the name. It was a fascinating read. Easier to kill someone non human…and yeah I’m not Jewish but my baby is. I also know that plenty of Jews support abortion . I will spare you the Hollywood list today though .
Denise,
You described something horrid just now. A man who mistook you for a whore. That isn’t beauty you are radiating if a guy old enough to be your son mistook you for a whore.
I’m talking about beauty that begins in your soul and commands respect and sacrificial love from men, not, “How much?” You’re better than that, Denise, but for so long as you don’t claim your true dignity, you accrue ever greater tarnish.
How much ?
How tragic!
Thanks Heather, I’m doing better. But yeah, thanks for leaving it at that. You can email me if you wish. :) I hope you’re doing well today.
“It could be said to be fair. The only problem is they’ve got it all wrong. The comparison is between slavery and the bondage of women perpetrated by a patriarchal structure. A series of changes, including Roe v Wade, are part of the continuing journey from this bondage for women.”
Can’t see it. What other things do you consider bondage that people (or just women) aren’t legally allowed to do, that harm other humans? Pregnant women can do every single thing a non-pregnant person can do, under pro-life laws all they would be prevented from doing is ending someone else’s life. That’s not “bondage”.
Yes Denise I have a very handsome brother in law but he’s got a huge problem. He treats women like prostitutes and he’s hurt plenty of them. Still does. As one woman put it to me…looking at Jimmy is like looking at a sharp BMW and then popping the hood only to find a rusty motor.
Again Jimmy looks at women like sex objects. He has his fun and dumps them. I’ve had a few at my door in tears asking “why would he do me that way?” My response is usually “I’m sorry but you shouldnt have gone to bed with him. Jimmy isn’t looking for a relationship marriage or anymore children.” Should have gotten to know him better.
I wish guys (or girls) like your BIL were more honest with what kind of people they were, Heather. If they want to sleep around, that’s their business but manipulating people isn’t cool. Seems like a lot of people enjoy the manipulation though.
Don’t like slavery? Don’t own slaves
Who should decide if I should own slaves? Me, or a bunch of politicians up in Washington?
Slavery is an intensely personal choice that should be up to the individual conscience
Abolitionists are always unloving to slave owners, and try to shame them. It’s so heartless of them
Abolitionists are such control freaks – trying to dictate how I should live my life
I’m personally opposed to slavery and would never own a slave, but I don’t think it should be illegal
My property, my choice
Morality cannot be imposed on slave owners by law. That would be theocratic and therefore evil
Yeah Jack I can’t even stand the son of a gun. He told me quite honestly “I don’t think I know how to love.” He and his brother were total opposites. I got the one with the big heart. Jimmy is being supported by a very needy woman. She’s trying to buy his love and she wants to marry him. He keeps cheating on her. However I have to hold these women accountable too. Takes 2 to tango. Despite the fact that she has already caught him cheating she still wants to marry him and in my opinion she plays the victim quite well.
@ prolifist: There is nothing more intimate — yet more public — than pregnancy. The comparisons you’re making just do not jell. The slave is NOT in the slave owner’s body. The slave owner is not being required to do something for the slave. If the unborn are to get born, the pregnant woman’s belly must get huge, she must carry that hugeness around with her, and she must look forward to the agonies of labor and birth.
There IS a case for outlawing abortion. Slavery is irrelevant to that case.
Oh wow, this is awkward…
“The great principle is the right of everyone to judge and decide for himself, whether a thing is right or wrong, whether it would be good or evil for them to adopt it; and the right of free action, the right of free thought, the right of free judgement upon the question is dearer to every true American than any other under a free government. … It is no answer to this argument to say that [it] is an evil and hence should not be tolerated. You must allow the people to decide for themselves. ”
-Stephen Douglas, on slavery, 1858
Just brought my brother in law into it because the American way for many is to discard if you don’t want it. Jimmys woman has an abortion history. Now she’s to old to have children but she is very wealthy. Jimmy works but he is enjoys the free ride. Lisa gives him everything he wants ..motorcycles cars a home trips clothes. She discarded her children and now Jimmy uses her for money and discards her. Her dad told her he’d pay for a lavish wedding but Jimmy keeps pushing the date back. He tells her to jump and she asks “how high?” Sad and degrading .
A Negro slave has a chance of escape (Underground Railroad, anyone?). An unwanted fetus does not. That is why I must vote no on this poll.
Apples to pears more than apples to oranges.
Heather,
Maybe..just maybe, Lisa knows all this, and is using Jimmy to “punish” herself for her abortion(s)?
Perhaps she thinks-deep down- that, because of what she’s done, she doesn’t deserve anything really “worthy” in life.
Just a thought.
It is not at all a new idea:
http://loafman.wordpress.com/2010/09/23/november-18-2008-abortion-todays-slavery/
Pamela sad but true. She has done prison time and her story is on line under an article called Mothers Keeper. She was victimized by everyone she’s ever cared about…the abortions without healing i also believe contributed to her behavior .
I doubt shed ever be on this blog so if you get a chance go to The State of Ohio vs Lisa and Joan Hall. Her mom was a lawyer and shes still in prison . They were both running a money scam. Lisa served 3 years.
And Pamela the same thing crossed my mind so you’re not alone in your thinking. She will keep /buy jimmy at any cost. And even with the cheating Jimbo gets a free pass every time. She loves him and her dad gives her money galore . Jim takes advantage of her weakness and low self esteem .
Better link run mothers keeper lisa and joan hall Cleveland ohio
Hey Pamela if u have a Facebook hit me up through Carla or Jill :)
“A Negro slave has a chance of escape (Underground Railroad, anyone?). An unwanted fetus does not. That is why I must vote no on this poll.Apples to pears more than apples to oranges.”
As x said the other day, sentient suffering is far worse to most liberals than the denial of life.
Anyway back on topic ..if we didn’t have so many people believing in discarding other people we wouldn’t have all these messes. Single parent homes abortion sky high Heartboken men annd women. Go back to the old fashioned ways and wait to see if a man or woman loves you enough to wait for sex. Demand marriage. If you aren’t looking for marriage then I’m not the one for you.
Wow. No contest for me. Until a slave works himsel/herself into my uterus and demands lodging, there isn’t even any basis for this discussion.
Absolutely nothing compares to hosting another person inside your body. I did it somewhat unwillingly at the time (though I’d certainly not change that now), but I still can’t understand how anyone could compare pregnancy to either slavery or the Holocaust. There simply is no realistic correlary to carrying another human inside you — though this may change as medical science advances and it becomes possible to host elsewhere a fetus from someone who would prefer an abortion.
I’m as anti-abortion as ever, but my views are based solely on the fairness of offering life to the baby outweighing any sacrifices the mother has to endure.
Using the unwillingness of slaves or Holocaust victims just legitimizes the rape and incest exceptions. I have problems with both of those scenarios, frankly, but I don’t believe the unborn child should pay for someone else’s sins.
Roxy agree the unborn should not have to pay for our sins. I believe the holocaust is used because of semantics. A jew is a useless parasite ….feminist Gloria Steinem ” A woman has a right to remove a parasite from her body.”
GLORIA aren’t you Jewish ? Should we stop feeding you because you are a useless eater? Nah cuz its all about me me me forget that parasite …its all about ME! I I I me. my career my sex life MY LIFE.
Last id read about Gloria was that shed gotten married she saiid “I married because that wss My CHOICE …nobody else tells me what to.do. My marriage my choice . At 70 something years old she still hasn’t figured it out. She is a terrible role model for women and remains a cold blooded selfish abortion pimp!
Is there hope for her? Who knows. Seems to me she’s been a ranting raving spoiled brat her entire life thinking only of herself . She feared having a baby would have ruined her career. Her kid and her could have been writers together but Gloria chose murder. OR she could have put her baby up for adoption and continued to live her dream.
It seems that people are sexual creatures. Wouldn’t the most realistic way of decreasing abortion be to try to re-direct human sexuality into channels that can’t end in abortion?
If girls and women who aren’t having the type of sex that leads to pregnancy don’t feel like they are missing out, they might be more likely to say “No” to that form of sex.
It seems that people are sexual creatures. Wouldn’t the most realistic way of decreasing abortion be to try to re-direct human sexuality into channels that can’t end in abortion?
Yes, Denise. It’s called virginity followed by fidelity in marriage. I highly recommend the latter to you as the former is evidently a fait accompli. A second,and equally serious suggestion would be that you seriously consider that I held out your great dignity as a woman in this thread and you responded by squealing with joy over a man old enough to be your son treating you like a whore by asking, “How much?”
A woman who thinks herself no better than a whore can’t be a serious part of the discussion on the right use of human sexuality or ending abortion. You were made for so much more, Denise. Reclaim that this Holy Week.
Gerard Nadal says:
March 25, 2013 at 2:54 am
It seems that people are sexual creatures. Wouldn’t the most realistic way of decreasing abortion be to try to re-direct human sexuality into channels that can’t end in abortion? Yes, Denise. It’s called virginity followed by fidelity in marriage. I highly recommend the latter to you as the former is evidently a fait accompli. A second,and equally serious suggestion would be that you seriously consider that I held out your great dignity as a woman in this thread and you responded by squealing with joy over a man old enough to be your son treating you like a whore by asking, “How much?”
(Denise) I wasn’t “squealing with joy” over this incident. I was rather disconcerted by it — especially since I was in no way dressed provocatively at the time it happened. Heck, I wasn’t even well-dressed: no make-up, loose-fitting jeans, t-shirt and sneaker. I thought the incident was just weird. A friend of mine, a gay man, comforted me by saying, “Take it as a compliment. It means a straight man can still find you attractive.”
I personally am sympathetic to the viewpoint stating we should rise above that which we have in common with other animals and put the accent on the intellect — which is distinctively human.
Denise,
I’m glad for the clarification. It goes way beyond the intellectual when it comes to human sex. At the biological level, the experience of bondedness is mediated in women’s brains by the release of oxytocin during sustained physical touch and orgasm. It is the biological “glue” for the experience of fidelity, the powerful feelings that make physically present in a dynamic and emotional/affective way the reality of covenantal union.
When humans engage in the sort of sexual adventurism (fornication) of which you are a champion, that’s where the wires get crossed, where men are taught to disregard those feelings of bonding and belonging their sex arouses in women, and sets the groundwork for future infidelity in marriage and the stunning rate of divorce.
God created us as we are for a reason, Denise. In reality, the experience of bonding women have during sex is unlike that of the animals. So, it’s not a matter of rising above them, as there is no common ground to begin with. Our women don’t go into heat once or twice a year, and the lower animals don’t bond as we do (even though some pair off for life). In truth, promiscuity denies the distinctly human and lowers ourselves from the elevated level from which we start. Nothing good comes of it.
Nothing.
Right Denise I’ve had boys young enough to be my son ask me out. Flattering but it made me laugh n i tell them well thats flattering but I’m old enough to be your mom..lol carry on
@ Gerard Nadal: I don’t champion sexual adventurism. I champion various means to avoid problem pregnancies. The women who get pregnant should want to have babies.
Heather says:
March 24, 2013 at 11:14 pm
Is there hope for her? Who knows. Seems to me she’s been a ranting raving spoiled brat her entire life thinking only of herself . She feared having a baby would have ruined her career. Her kid and her could have been writers together but Gloria chose murder. OR she could have put her baby up for adoption and continued to live her dream.
(Denise) The main difference between myself and the other people here is that abortion is THE problem. To me, abortion is a horror that results from underlying problems connected to girls and women getting pregnant who are not willing to have and raise babies.
Single motherhood is a problem. Children having children is a problem. And adoption is a problem. In the best of all possible worlds, there might still be adoption in cases where the mother died in childbirth or was killed or incapacitated while the child was young. However, girls and women would not have babies and place them for adoption because they can’t or don’t want to raise babies. The first experience that a baby has should not be separation from the woman who carried for nine months and gave birth and whose body is prepared by nature to nourish that baby. The mother may very well need HELP raising the baby and mothers have had assistance raising children all throughout history and in pre-history. As adoptive mother Nancy Verrier has noted, a baby taken away from the mother inevitably suffers a “primal wound.”
“Oh, but it’s so much better to be wounded than to be killed!” Yes. But it is even better to be born to a mother who is both willing and able to care for the baby. A separation trauma shouldn’t be a baby’s first experience.
In response to
DeniseNoe says:
March 24, 2013 at 6:08 pm
“The fact is that pregnancy is not easy. Pregnancy imposes physical and emotional costs on the pregnant female. It can be very painful and has dangers.”
Hi Denise,
The fact is that life is not easy. Life imposes physical and emotional costs on all who live. It can be very painful and has dangers.
If the above were justification for legally protecting people who want to kill in order to avoid some risks, then we may as well erase all murder laws on the books.
Blessedly, life also brings trememdous reward and true beauty… for those willing to face the risks.
When i mentioned the young men who ask me out..to clarify i meant my 20 year old son. Not my 3 yo..i just can’t date a boy that young. Id feel like a moron. I’m polite and tell them I’m flattered but no cigar. I could never understand the Demi Ashton thing. Id feel like I was with my kid brother.
Not fair – abortion is worse. We are talking about the massacre of 50 million people in the U.S. alone.
However, there are a lot of comparisions. The pro-slavery people denied the personhood of a whole race of people to enslave them, the pro-aborts deny the personhood of a whole age group of people to kill them. Many of their arguments are the same: “The government can’t tell me what to do with MY property”(even though a person can never be owned by someone else ”The government can’t tell me what to do with MY body” (even though the preborn child is not part of her body), etc. etc.
@ Denise March 24, 2013 at 3:13 pm
But the mother (and father) put their child in the dependant situation to begin with. (As a side note: abortion is not just “expelling the unborn child”. It is brutally ripping him/her apart.)
If you have a newborn baby (yours), but no one can/will take care of or adopt the baby for several months should you be able to kill him/her or abandon him/her by the side of road, because otherwise you are being forced to care for the baby using your body?
The fact is parents have duties to their children – to care for them and certainly to refrain from killing/abusing them. This applies no matter what the child’s developmental level.
The essential human rights issues concerning chattel slavery, abortion, certain treatment of Native Americans and and mentally handicapped, and the Nazi Holocaust of the Jews are the same:
A particular group of persons, using the laws of the land, have defined specific sub-groups of persons as being “less than human” and undeserving of human rights. The oppressed persons are then treated as material things — bought and sold, used, abused and discarded.
In every case, good people have sacrificed and worked against the disordered culture to protect and save the oppressed victims. These persons are vilified and even imprisoned and executed by the dominate culture, but history eventually remembers them as heroes.