Abortion and Slavery: Two Pods with the Same Pea?

[jwoodie]

A comparison of abortion to slavery is certainly not a new idea, but a reminder of what our nation was dealing with 160 years ago is pertinent to the biggest moral issue we are dealing with today. In terms of which side is making what arguments, the parallels are stunning:

1. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates both argued on behalf of persons without any rights or voices.

2. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates argue that these persons are merely property which may be disposed of at the whim of their owners.

3. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates were willing to compromise be allowing individual States to decide these matters.

4. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates wanted to prevent any States from limiting their property rights to dispose of these persons.

Do you see a common pattern here? Which side values human lives over property rights and which does not? Where do you stand?

 

[Moonglow]

No one said a woman or a child is anyone's property that is an untrue recollection of yours.

 

[Ghost1776]

A comparison of abortion to slavery is certainly not a new idea, but a reminder of what our nation was dealing with 160 years ago is pertinent to the biggest moral issue we are dealing with today. In terms of which side is making what arguments, the parallels are stunning:

1. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates both argued on behalf of persons without any rights or voices.

2. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates argue that these persons are merely property which may be disposed of at the whim of their owners.

3. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates were willing to compromise be allowing individual States to decide these matters.

4. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates wanted to prevent any States from limiting their property rights to dispose of these persons.

Do you see a common pattern here? Which side values human lives over property rights and which does not? Where do you stand?

It’s so nice to see others who are noticing these other asses who seem to think human life is just a pos laying on the ground.
These next 3 generations are going to be a real treat for the asses today.

 

[Ghost1776]

It’s so nice to see others who are noticing these other asses who seem to think human life is just a pos laying on the ground.
These next 3 generations are going to be a real treat for the asses today.

P.S.
These kids today are going to be the dumbest mother fkrs around the globe. Mask has destroyed out children’s learning in multiple ways.

Mask Wearing Has Left a Generation of Toddlers Struggling With Speech and Social Skills

www.blacklistednews.com

 

[jwoodie]

No one said a woman or a child is anyone's property that is an untrue recollection of yours.

Slave owners said it all the time, just as abortionists argue that an unborn child is the exclusive property of its mother (to be disposed of as she sees fit).

 

[BlindBoo]

A comparison of abortion to slavery is certainly not a new idea, but a reminder of what our nation was dealing with 160 years ago is pertinent to the biggest moral issue we are dealing with today. In terms of which side is making what arguments, the parallels are stunning:

1. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates both argued on behalf of persons without any rights or voices.

2. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates argue that these persons are merely property which may be disposed of at the whim of their owners.

3. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates were willing to compromise be allowing individual States to decide these matters.

4. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates wanted to prevent any States from limiting their property rights to dispose of these persons.

Do you see a common pattern here? Which side values human lives over property rights and which does not? Where do you stand?

A 12 week old developing fetus is not baby or a person. Slave babies were valuable property after the slave trade was banned.

Thank god science has freed women from the natural cycle and provided safe alternatives to being a chattel baby factory.

 

[Ms. Turquoise]

A comparison of abortion to slavery is certainly not a new idea, but a reminder of what our nation was dealing with 160 years ago is pertinent to the biggest moral issue we are dealing with today. In terms of which side is making what arguments, the parallels are stunning:

1. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates both argued on behalf of persons without any rights or voices.

2. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates argue that these persons are merely property which may be disposed of at the whim of their owners.

3. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates were willing to compromise be allowing individual States to decide these matters.

4. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates wanted to prevent any States from limiting their property rights to dispose of these persons.

Do you see a common pattern here? Which side values human lives over property rights and which does not? Where do you stand?

An unborn baby and an enslaved person are 2 completely different things.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

A comparison of abortion to slavery is certainly not a new idea, but a reminder of what our nation was dealing with 160 years ago is pertinent to the biggest moral issue we are dealing with today. In terms of which side is making what arguments, the parallels are stunning:

1. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates both argued on behalf of persons without any rights or voices.

2. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates argue that these persons are merely property which may be disposed of at the whim of their owners.

3. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates were willing to compromise be allowing individual States to decide these matters.

4. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates wanted to prevent any States from limiting their property rights to dispose of these persons.

Do you see a common pattern here? Which side values human lives over property rights and which does not? Where do you stand?

Only one problem with your comparison. The anti-abortion crowd closely correlates with the people who wanted to preserve slavery.

 

[jwoodie]

A 12 week old developing fetus is not baby or a person.

That sounds like it is a baby after 12 weeks. But you don't believe that, do you?

 

[jwoodie]

An unborn baby and an enslaved person are 2 completely different things.

They are both human beings.

 

[jwoodie]

Only one problem with your comparison. The anti-abortion crowd closely correlates with the people who wanted to preserve slavery.

That's the only problem? I think you have missed the point.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

An unborn baby and an enslaved person are 2 completely different things.

Both are human beings, whose humanity is denied by those who wish to abuse them, as an excuse for that abuse.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Only one problem with your comparison. The anti-abortion crowd closely correlates with the people who wanted to preserve slavery.

Which people would those be?

Democraps were the party of slavery, and now they are the party of abortion. The more things change, the more things stay the same.

 

[whitehall]

Wrong forum with a strange idiom twist of "two peas in a pod".

 

[Rigby5]

A comparison of abortion to slavery is certainly not a new idea, but a reminder of what our nation was dealing with 160 years ago is pertinent to the biggest moral issue we are dealing with today. In terms of which side is making what arguments, the parallels are stunning:

1. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates both argued on behalf of persons without any rights or voices.

2. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates argue that these persons are merely property which may be disposed of at the whim of their owners.

3. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates were willing to compromise be allowing individual States to decide these matters.

4. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates wanted to prevent any States from limiting their property rights to dispose of these persons.

Do you see a common pattern here? Which side values human lives over property rights and which does not? Where do you stand?

That is totally irrational.
The fact there can be some similarities in strategies does not mean there is a single similarity in substance or abstraction.

1. has absolutely nothing at all to do with it. And obvious a fetus can never have any rights or voice.

2, No one said a fetus was "property". The reality is that a fetus is a parasite that is harmful to a woman if she does not want a child.

3. Letting states decide inherent rights was proven to be totally corrupt, and the 14th amendment ended that forever.

4. There is no similarity between slavery and abortion. Slavery was to abuse rights in order to make a profit. Abortion is to prevent a family from being bankrupt by excess children.

 

[jwoodie]

The reality is that a fetus is a parasite that is harmful to a woman if she does not want a child.

So what is your recommended method of killing this parasite? Dismemberment in the womb or an ice pick in the head just before delivery?

 

[Rigby5]

Which people would those be?

Democraps were the party of slavery, and now they are the party of abortion. The more things change, the more things stay the same.

Wrong.
Those who were for slavery were the wealthy elite, who are the right wing these days.
Party labels change over time, so are pointless.

 

[Rigby5]

So what is your recommended method of killing this parasite? Dismemberment in the womb or an ice pick in the head just before delivery?

Doesn't matter to the fetus because it is not sentient, conscious, or self aware yet.
The choice has to be up to the one doing it, as it could be difficult for them.

 

[Rigby5]

Both are human beings, whose humanity is denied by those who wish to abuse them, as an excuse for that abuse.

Wrong.
A fetus is not a human being because it is not yet sentient.
And slavery could be appropriate as a means for criminals to pay back for a crime.

 

[Dragonlady]

A comparison of abortion to slavery is certainly not a new idea, but a reminder of what our nation was dealing with 160 years ago is pertinent to the biggest moral issue we are dealing with today. In terms of which side is making what arguments, the parallels are stunning:

1. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates both argued on behalf of persons without any rights or voices.

2. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates argue that these persons are merely property which may be disposed of at the whim of their owners.

3. The anti-slavery and anti-abortion advocates were willing to compromise be allowing individual States to decide these matters.

4. The pro-slavery and pro-abortion advocates wanted to prevent any States from limiting their property rights to dispose of these persons.

Do you see a common pattern here? Which side values human lives over property rights and which does not? Where do you stand?

Slavery and abortion are in NO WAY SIMILAR.

Abortion involves a woman's right to determine the size of her family.

Slavery concerns a person's right to their personal freedom, and the fruits of their labour.

You keep trying to make stripping a woman of her right to choose her own family and her own destiny a noble thing and it's not noble at all. It's base and disgusting.