Abortion is as unjust as slavery. An American historical perspective.

Discussion in 'Abortion' started by DixNickson, Mar 25, 2017.

  1. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,843
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    In American history, a man viewed as the legal property of another had his case taken to the US Supreme Court in his quest to reaffirm his God-given (free will) liberty and rights. As he was conceived, born and resided in the US (and I believe, territories) all of his life, many would think this a slam-dunk victory for the man but alas, his freedom and rights were denied, as he was considered property, not a citizen, and as property, he was, in the eyes of all his Masters, less than human. His name, Dred Scott.


    Today, as in the recent past we have millions upon millions of unheard cases from contemporary Dred Scotts, who have done no wrong but have been denied due process and their human identity. They have been denied the promised American destiny of free men and women, equal in their creation.


    Abortion has been, can continue to be promoted, by abortion proponents, as a good thing for Mother and unborn Child. Momma does not want Baby and Baby is better off dead because he or she is unwanted. Truly not unlike, when slavery was a legal property right and condition, making the pro-slavery position akin to the symbiotic/nurturing/beneficial relationship between the Master and Slave. The Master provides and cares for his slave and the slave serves loyally because he has employment and basic needs provided for by the Master for all his days. Maybe, for the slave, it is all in who the master is?


    Still there have always been opponents of slavery and unlawfully execution/lynching and other crimes against humanity. I like Abraham Lincoln's idea that if slavery is such a great lifestyle then its supporters should live it. I am not for unlawful or immorally intervening and ending human life so, I will not suggest that those who would support taking the life of the unborn, live it, and allow their own life to be subject to the act of termination, to get, you know, a feel for the experience they see as simply a righteous choice. Just saying Abe might have been on to something there, kinda an in-your-face "Golden Rule" experience thing.
     
    yabberefugee, MDG045 and Battle3 like this.
  2. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    49,125
    Likes Received:
    17,425
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I see you denigrate the suffering of slaves by comparing them to a fetus who suffers nothing.

    The slaves were BORN persons which means they should've had rights all along.

    A fetus is not born therefore not a person with rights.

    IF a fetus was ever deemed a "person" with rights with those rights comes the same RESTRICTIONS every other person has. It cannot use another's body to sustain it's life, you can't, I can't, it can't, no one can.


    The ONLY way slavery relates to abortion is if women are forced to give birth, THAT is slavery.
     
    Snorri, BingoBongoLand, Guno and 2 others like this.
  3. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,843
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Thanks for your kind reply however I think you've missed the point.

    Do you see slavery as exclusively illegal or unjust and immoral too?

    All men (term inclusive of all us humans, men or women) are created equal. Creation begins at the beginning for us humans, we continue to grow and develop from that point forward until natural or unnatural death.

    I absolutely love what this country, America, can be. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." I believe that. You should too. Even the early Hebrews/Jews and Christians knew of the presence of children (created and existing within the womb) before their birth. We deny those self-evident truths when we unjustly and immorally take life or other crimes against individuals and humanity. Ending the life of a developing human being/fetus/neonate/infant/child/adult/man/woman (however you choose to see that life) who has committed NO capital crime is simply criminal, don't you think that too?
     
  4. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    49,125
    Likes Received:
    17,425
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, abortion is not criminal, it's a legal medical procedure as it should be. ( I gather you protest loudly and frequently about war?)

    I see you choose to ignore the content of the quote of mine you posted.


    """I see you denigrate the suffering of slaves by comparing them to a fetus who suffers nothing.

    The slaves were BORN persons which means they should've had rights all along.

    A fetus is not born therefore not a person with rights.

    IF a fetus was ever deemed a "person" with rights with those rights comes the same RESTRICTIONS every other person has. It cannot use another's body to sustain it's life, you can't, I can't, it can't, no one can.



    The ONLY way slavery relates to abortion is if women are forced to give birth, THAT is slavery.
     
  5. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,843
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    As abortion is so was slavery, for a time...legal.
     
  6. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    49,125
    Likes Received:
    17,425
    Trophy Points:
    113

    SO? That's hardly Some Big Revelation........and still doesn't address what I posted :

    """I see you denigrate the suffering of slaves by comparing them to a fetus who suffers nothing.

    The slaves were BORN persons which means they should've had rights all along.

    A fetus is not born therefore not a person with rights.

    IF a fetus was ever deemed a "person" with rights with those rights comes the same RESTRICTIONS every other person has. It cannot use another's body to sustain it's life, you can't, I can't, it can't, no one can.



    The ONLY way slavery relates to abortion is if women are forced to give birth, THAT is slavery.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2017
  7. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,843
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    A comparison in loss of life, liberty and happiness-their entire future. The abortion procedure is akin to a medical lynching-unless one thinks the unborn have it coming and in that case it would be considered an earthly self-centered sacrament performed on the Altar of Self-serving Convenience and Profit.

    Agreed, many Americans, as citizens worldwide, were opposed to slavery but yet it was still a legal institution with property rights for its masters, as is the institution of abortion today.

    Slaves were not persons, therefore without rights too (per the SCOTUS decision referenced earlier and others). Sadly, history often repeats itself.

    Come now, birth is the designed conclusion of a successful pregnancy. Come to think of it your argument is not unfamiliar, it sounds eerily familiar to the end the redistribution/confiscation of wealth/government assistance position, simply change "body" to "possessions" "wealth" or "property" or "fruits of labor" of another.

    Slavery is not part of a human perpetuity insuring bodily process, though it was part of the socio/economic/legal process. I don't think one can no more force a women to give birth then they can make a pregnant woman not give birth. The female body's design addresses that.

    Having said all that, from my perspective, there are at least three victims in every abortion, mother, child and society-For Whom The Bell Tolls, Dear FoxHastings.
     
  8. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    49,125
    Likes Received:
    17,425
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I explained what would happen if a fetus was declared a person: IF a fetus was ever deemed a "person" with rights with those rights comes the same RESTRICTIONS every other person has. It cannot use another's body to sustain it's life, you can't, I can't, it can't, no one can.

    And your reply showed you have NO idea what my words said: """Come now, birth is the designed conclusion of a successful pregnancy. Come to think of it your argument is not unfamiliar, it sounds eerily familiar to the end the redistribution/confiscation of wealth/government assistance position, simply change "body" to "possessions" "wealth" or "property" or "fruits of labor" of another."""


    NO, you can't change the words.

    It seems you feel that if you need a blood transfusion or a new heart you can FORCE another person to give you blood or a new heart. Really!???

    Uh, NO you cannot force another to use their body to sustain your life PHYSICALLY...... as in "fetus is using woman's body to sustain it's life".

    IF the fetus was deemed a person it wouldn't have the right to use another's body to sustain it's life....no more than you or I could force someone to give us a heart or lung or blood...

    You seem to want the fetus to have more rights than the person it's in......who else do you want to have more rights?


    No matter what a woman's body was "designed" to do only she has a right to say what happens to it, just as YOU do.....NO woman is obligated to give birth....and YES, slave owners also FORCED their slaves to give birth so slavery has more to do with Anti-Choicers...
     
  9. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,843
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    FYI-Dix enhanced with BOLD the quoted member's first sentence so the context/origin of Dix's QUESTION is known.


    Doctor Tec, an ominous caveat to be sure but thank you for the kindness of not charging me for this analytical session :) .


    C'mon, I cannot give or take rights, these exist independently of me and others like me.


    One may violate another's rights but the violator is not held accountable unless judged by the law.


    You spoke of the rights of a slave. QUESTION: As I was unaware of a slave's rights, please share what those rights specifically were/are? Thank you.

    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________



    Societies/organizations/groups typically have a code of conduct. For many years there had been prohibitions against killing the unborn, not that it didn't happen mind you, but society had set a standard that we should not allow the killing of our expectant mother's unborn children. I think that was a good standard to have not unlike society's standard against murder, rape, theft, libel and slander etc.


    So what power do I have to usurp free will? None. Some societies, through institutional mechanisms, set-up ways where differing view points can be discussed and allow the aurgument's merit (free speech) to warm people to its position. That is a power, at least in America, that each of us has.

    ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________



    That is Interesting, that you've noticed that "parallels" have gone unrecognized. Discernment, perhaps even abstract thinking may be useful assets in this interpetative endeavor. How can you not be sympathetic for the ones without a defender, without a voice and the weight of the government allowing them to be targeted for execution absent due process?

    __________________________________________________________



    For tecoyah, FoxHastings & Derideo_Te - If we're all being honest it is somewhat amazing, to me, that none of you have the vision to see the parallels in experience and disposition between the slave and the unborn. They find themselves in a condition that they did not create. From moment to moment they are provided for humanely (or not) according to their master(s) (emotional state?). Each has his or her life under the absolute control of another, allowed only what the master deems to be. The very length and quality of their lives is in the hands and at the whim of another. A power over/submissive to relationship of another's making. They (slave/unborn) are called by names that denote a status of less than personhood. Lastly their position as slaves/the unborn allows the master and those supporting the master's authority to see each as simple chattel, to be disposed of in a way pleasing to the master because they are, after all, something less than or maybe, just not quite human (enough).


    NOTE: grouped these together to save a little space and a "birds of a feather" sorta thing as well.
     
  10. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    28,331
    Likes Received:
    9,245
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    My mention of a slaves rights was a direct response to YOUR mention of a slaves rights in comparison to a fetus...do not try to dodge by placing this on me. You did not answer my question instead pushing the topic to the judiciary which has already decided on it The therapy session is not yet over but a possible breakthrough is awaiting your honest answer to the question:
    Who do you want to have rights...the woman or the fetus?
    You cannot choose both as it is one or the other.
     
    FoxHastings and Derideo_Te like this.
  11. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,843
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    In a relationship between husband and wife who would you choose to have rights? Between master and slave who would you choose to gave rights?
     
  12. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    28,331
    Likes Received:
    9,245
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This is not my business in either case as both scenarios involve two adult stranger and one involves private activities the two are capable of figuring out themselves and the other involves a situation involving legal issues and servitude. Neither are remotely similar to the topic and neither answers my question.

    Is it that you are afraid to honestly answer or are you ashamed?
     
    FoxHastings and Derideo_Te like this.
  13. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    44,635
    Likes Received:
    36,756
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How can YOU not be sympathetic to the single mother working for minimum wage that you want to burden with yet another child to raise absent due process?

    Your fallacious "appeal to emotion" cuts both ways!

    As far as the Constitution goes she does have individual reproductive rights under the Law of the Land that give her the freedom to choose what she does with HER OWN BODY, not yours!

    Your misplaced sympathies are not the way the Law of the Land works. All attempts to legislate emotion based morality have failed miserably. Prohibition and DOMA were nothing more than pandering to the religious right and both were overturned. Why would this "appeal to emotion" be any different?

    Enslaving women to your personal theist doctrine is not going to work because 25% of all pregnancies naturally abort. Explain how your ban on abortion is going to detect the difference between a woman who naturally aborted and one who used an abortificant pill to produce exactly the same result. You can't because there is nothing to detect which means that your attempt to enslave women won't work in reality.

    If you seriously care about reducing abortion then the sane and sensible route to take is prevention. Providing women with free effective long acting contraception reduces pregnancies and the need for abortions.

    There is no fallacious "appeal to emotion" when it comes to providing funding for those effective long acting contraceptives. They are far less prone to failure and the results of the studies have demonstrated a 40% reduction in abortions.

    So rather than enslave women and deny them their Constitutional rights why are you not advocating for a means to reduce abortion by 40%? You won't have to defend your slavery legislation in front of the Supreme Court and you will have made a major step towards eliminating abortions.

    What is stopping you from endorsing this position and working towards making it a nationwide program?
     
    Guno and FoxHastings like this.
  14. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    49,125
    Likes Received:
    17,425
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your statement """our expectant mother's unborn children """ (red bolding, mine) shows a great mistake and the base of your problem, you think you own pregnant women, just like slave owners thought they owned slaves...

    Your big speech could apply to YOUR attitude towards women and instead of slave /fetus apply it to slave/women and I have altered it to show it:



    SLAVES/WOMEN (paraphrasing from a speech above:
    They find themselves in a condition that they did not create. From moment to moment they are provided for humanely (or not) according to their master(s) (emotional state?). (How true, Anti-Choicers are so unstable emotionally)
    Each has his or her life under the absolute control of another, allowed only what the master deems to be. The very length and quality of their lives is in the hands and at the whim of another. A power over/submissive to relationship of another's making. They (slave/women) are called by names that denote a status of less than personhood. Lastly their position as slaves/women allows the master and those supporting the master's authority to see each as simple chattel, to be disposed of in a way pleasing to the master because they are, after all, something less than or maybe, just not quite human ( male) enough.





    YOU never answered : "" what right do you have to dictate to another person what they must do with their own body.""


    You said slavery is illegal and it is, so what right do you have to dictate to another person what they must do with their own body ?
     
    Last edited: Mar 27, 2017
    Guno and Derideo_Te like this.
  15. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,843
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Let's talk about power instead, as this is what one exercises over another. I do not claim or wish for such raw, naked power.


    _____________________________________________________________________
    What have my posts been or revealed? Answers if you are willing to accept them. You asked about bestowing rights regarding mother and her unborn child. OK what is it that they share? A relationship, simply a human relationship with all its complexities and responsibilities. You should be asking on whom would you bestow POWER (not a right). To bring about the death of another human being is an exercise in Power. A master can hold such power over the slave.
    ______________________________________________________________________
    Slavery was once the law of the land too, until the anti-slavery forces gathered in strength and rescued a generation and generations to come from that horrible fate. Let's work towards this.
     
  16. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    49,125
    Likes Received:
    17,425
    Trophy Points:
    113

    You want to talk about power instead? Ya, since you obviously couldn't address the post of mine you quoted :

    ""Your statement """our expectant mother's unborn children """ (red bolding, mine) shows a great mistake and the base of your problem, you think you own pregnant women, just like slave owners thought they owned slaves...

    Your big speech could apply to YOUR attitude towards women and instead of slave /fetus apply it to slave/women and I have altered it to show it:



    SLAVES/WOMEN (paraphrasing from a speech above:
    They find themselves in a condition that they did not create. From moment to moment they are provided for humanely (or not) according to their master(s) (emotional state?). (How true, Anti-Choicers are so unstable emotionally)
    Each has his or her life under the absolute control of another, allowed only what the master deems to be. The very length and quality of their lives is in the hands and at the whim of another. A power over/submissive to relationship of another's making. They (slave/women) are called by names that denote a status of less than personhood. Lastly their position as slaves/women allows the master and those supporting the master's authority to see each as simple chattel, to be disposed of in a way pleasing to the master because they are, after all, something less than or maybe, just not quite human ( male) enough.




    YOU never answered : "" what right do you have to dictate to another person what they must do with their own body.""


    You said slavery is illegal and it is, so what right do you have to dictate to another person what they must do with their own body ?






    YOU: """Slavery was once the law of the land too, until the anti-slavery forces gathered in strength and rescued a generation and generations to come from that horrible fate. Let's work towards this."""

    Well you found a connection between slavery and abortion but not much of one...those against something changing what they're against.....except that the Anti-Slavery people were about rights for everyone and you only care about the rights of fetuses and wish to destroy the rights of women and make them no more than slaves.
     
    Guno likes this.
  17. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    47,864
    Likes Received:
    8,822
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Dix - Your whole argument is contingent on the assumption that a "Zygote/Embryo/Fetus" is a Living human/ Baby/Child.

    As such your argument is a logical fallacy because it contains and assumed premise.

    A large part of the abortion debate centers on whether or not a human exists - for example at the zygote stage.

    There is no consensus among subject matter experts in the domain areas of Biology, Bioethics, and Philosophy.
     
  18. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    44,635
    Likes Received:
    36,756
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why would anyone want to "work towards" ENSLAVING pregnant women because that is exactly what you are advocating?
     
    FoxHastings, Guno and Zeffy like this.
  19. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,843
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Hmm...that is interesting; some thought American slaves were less than human too, while others thought they were/are human. This is kinda starting to sound familiar. Undoubtedly, each side believed they certainly had the correct perspective. At the risk of being redundant; one knew they were less than human while the other knew they were at least human. Nothing new under the sun; looks as though history is repeating itself.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2017
  20. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,843
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Whay you're saying is an expectant mother is enslaved, is that it?
     
  21. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,654
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Another abortion thread based on semantic definitions where abortion is equated to the holocaust or slavery.

    SSDD.
     
  22. DixNickson

    DixNickson Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,843
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    DO you even read my responses to you or others?
     
  23. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    49,125
    Likes Received:
    17,425
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, why don't you read mine?
     
  24. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    47,864
    Likes Received:
    8,822
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your analogy is not the greatest.

    We share 50% of DNA with a banana. On this basis should we give a banana 50% of the rights that a human has ? http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/humans-share-50-dna-bananas-2482139

    When look to the Sub Domain of Biology - Human Taxonomy - The characteristics that make some entity a human (Homo sapiens) are given.

    You need to be a member of a large number of clubs - Domain, Kingdom, Phylum, Class Order, Family, Genus, Species

    Entrance into these clubs is based on certain characteristics (having a spine, an opposable thumb and so on)

    A black man has all of the required memberships. A zygote has almost none -

    A single human cell is of the Domain Eukariota - it is a single eukaryotic cell- a single celled eukaryote (although it is debatable whether a single human cell qualifies as an organism under a non simplistic definition).

    A cow - which many of us meat eaters like to eat - has far more in common with a human (from a taxonomical perspective) than a zygote.

    Your argument is seriously flawed :)
     
  25. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    44,635
    Likes Received:
    36,756
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How else would you describe forcing a woman to give birth to an unwanted child?
     

Share This Page