The act of slavery and the act of abortion are not related. A mother is not putting her fetus to work for her to boost her own personal wealth. Likewise, a slave does not live inside it's master's body. These are two unique situations that are not related to each other and both practices would continue to exist even if that argument was never made for either. The fact that the same type of argument may have been used for both does not actually mean the two are related or similar. It feels like a huge stretch to try and tie them together with a single argument, one that was used erroneously in the slavery debate to begin with. Conceptually, the two are not alike at all, considering it's hard to have a master/slave relationship with a pregnancy when there is only one person to begin with. That to me sounds like something you'd find on some kind of multiple personality disorder fetish website.
CONCENTRATE. Read this very slowly. NO-one is comparing the fetus to the slaves. We are comparing two groups of people. Those who used the "they aint like us" argument to deny basic human rights to slaves and those who use the same argument today - to deny basic human rights to prenatal human beings in the womb. That is the extent of the comparison being made.
Same response as above: CONCENTRATE. Read this very slowly. NO-one is comparing fetuses to slaves. We are comparing two groups of people. Those who used the "they aint like us" argument to deny basic human rights to slaves and those who use the same argument today - to deny basic human rights to prenatal human beings in the womb. That is the extent of the comparison being made.
Who cares? Fetuses are not like slaves and women will never become incubating slaves like you want them to. End of story.
I do. No-one was trying to say they are. I want equal rights for the children who are being denied. End of story.
They do have equal rights, they just don't have MORE rights like you want to give them. No human being born or not has the right to use another human being's body for any reason including, but not limited to, survival. Why do you think the fetus deserves more rights than the rest of us?
I disagree. Basic human rights are not "given." Children are entitled to the same protections of our laws that everyone else is entitled to. Equal rights and equal protections. Nothing less and nothing more.
I know what the comparison is and it's incorrect. Fetuses and slaves are not two "groups" of people. They can't be lumped together. They are about as different as they can get. This same argument could be used to justify eating vegetables. Same exact argument, same exact dynamic, and yet it doesn't even involve a person. The same could be true of deer, bacteria(which we slaughter on an unimaginable scale, with glee) and every other living thing. The real point of this comparison and why it's made is to attach abortion to the stigma of slavery. This is exactly how things worked in the McCarthy era. Didn't like something, attach it to communism.
"""Those who used the "they aint like us" argument to deny basic human rights to slaves and those who use the same argument today - to deny basic human rights to prenatal human beings in the womb.""" Is that kinda like argument the conservatives use: ,,, "they aint like us" argument to deny basic human rights to gays and those who use the same argument today - to deny basic human rights to persons who are tax paying citizens but aren't heterosexuals.
Thank you for (at least) seeing that those two mindsets and arguments are comparable. As far as the basic human rights of gays being denied. What "basic human rights" is it that you feel has been denied to Gay? You're not claiming that marriage is a basic human right are you?
Exactly. And no person born or not may use another person's body for survival or put another person's health and life at risk for their own survival. What part of that are you not understanding? - - - Updated - - - You hit the nail directly on the head.
This calls for speculation. The laws could just as easily say that "To the extent that a woman's autonomy is compromised during pregnancy - unless she was raped - she compromised it herself." and they could end up saying what you think they should. I'm betting on the first one.
If a fetus deserves life and it's right to life trumps the woman's right to make all medical decisions concerning her own body (which includes her uterus thank you very much) then a fetus conceived of rape cannot be aborted either. You think fetuses are children, so why is it ok to kill a child whose daddy was a rapist but not a child whose parents chose to have sex? Where is the logic in that?
Show me where I ever claimed that a prenatal child's right to the equal protections of our laws - gives that child the right to trump ALL medical decisions of the woman. You can't do that - because I never claimed anything close to that. I never said it was okay. Especially with me personally. Do you know the difference between something with 'okay' and something being 'legally justified?' If you want to have an in depth discussion (with me) on the rape exception? I will be glad to participate in that discussion in another thread. HOWEVER, I'm not going to debate the rape exception with someone who can't acknowledge the fact that it involves a child and their rights too - as well as the mothers.
I never said you did. You might as well leave the forum then because you'll be extremely hard pressed to find a pro-choicer who actually believes that fetuses are children.
I'm not going to drop their names - but I've already met more than a few abortion proponents here who don't deny that an abortion kills a child. I actually have much respect for them - and I've even repped them for being bold enough to call it like it is.
And you will also be hard pressed to find a pro-choicer who actually states when the exact moment they feel the fetus does become a child. I have an instinct to protect children from harm, because they are weaker. Pro-choicers want me to hold off on that instinct to protect children until the moment of birth. Then, I can consider it a child, and have instinct to protect it. But before that, I'm a religious nut, if I have any instinct whatsoever to protect that child. But poof, it pops out, and within a nanosecond, I'm no longer a religious nut for wanting to protect children. Not only that, but I am actually considered a nut if I don't want to protect the child, that literally 1 second before, I was a nut for wanting to protect. It doesn't make sense people.
Which is my point. We know that a child becomes a child gradually. But pro-choicers want us to delay any thought that the fetus is a child until birth. And then, instantaneously, we can start thinking and acting as if it were our child.
Excuse me, but from what I've read of your comments, YOU are the one comparing women's right to choose to SLAVE OWNER's right to own a slave! DUH! - - - Updated - - - Nope. . . not necessarily until birth, but at the least until a differentiated stem cells give the cluster of undifferentiated cells the foundation of human life: a brain with basic voluntary functions, which happens around week 19: So. . .basically, the current abortion laws have it right: abortions are legal until week 20 (unless there are real risk for the mother's health or the fetus is severely damaged, which probably means that the brain is not functioning/developing normally anyway!) What a coincidence. . . isn't it?
And when exactly is that? I'm just looking for the time at which, as a father, it is ok for me to start thinking and acting like those cells in my wife's womb are my child.
I just added a link to my previous comments, so you should find your answer there! By the way. . .you are welcome to act and feel that the cluster of cells in your wife wombs are a child ANYTIME YOU WANT! In fact, many couples who very much desire a child, begin to imagine that child as a fully functioning human being, giving it a name, purchasing clothes and toys, and even starting "college funds" even PRIOR to becoming pregnant! And that is GREAT! I know we had a name for our "child" even prior to getting married. . we even bought a pair of baby shoes for "him." Yet, it took us another 2 years before becoming pregnant with my son! But do not push YOUR desire to have a child on those who do not feel that having a child is their goal, or feel that they are not able at a specific time to deal with a pregnancy!
