[I stumbled across this post from Frank Turek a while back and thought it worth the repost. It’s not as involved as the comparisons I made in my other article comparing slavery and abortion. But this includes a comparison of the cases that helped justify slavery and abortion.]
“Slavery and Abortion: The Justifications Are the Same” by Frank Turek, 22 January 2011.
Today is the 38th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, one the most famous cases in Supreme Court history. As we reflect on 52 million dead since the decision– and are reminded of the horrific reality of abortion by the discovery of the abortuary in Philadelphia (click here if you can stomach reading the grand jury report)– note that Roe has a number of parallels with another famous case, Dred Scott v. Sandford.
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
7 to 2
Slavery is legal
Blacks are not persons
Blacks are the property of their owners (masters)
Abolitionists should not impose morality on the slave owner
Roe v. Wade (1973)
7 to 2
Abortion is legal
Unborn are not persons
Unborn are the property of their owners (mothers)
Pro-lifers should not impose morality on the mother
The truth of the abortion matter is that everyone is seeking to impose morality. While pro-lifers want to impose continued pregnancy on the mother, pro-abortion people are imposing death on the baby whenever an abortion is chosen. Yes, a woman has a right to control her own body, but not if she kills an innocent human being unnecessarily in the process. And we know scientifically that there is a 100% genetic human being in a woman’s womb.
Unlike slavery, which took a war to end, it’s time we peacefully ended this abortion tragedy in America. The right to life is the right to all other rights– if you don’t have life you don’t have anything.