This is a rerun from 2007.
A couple readers were offended by one of the points in the Nancy Pelosi and bad pro-abortion reasoning post, so I thought I would clarify and expand on those thoughts. Here is the offending section:
Ms. Pelosi also uses this poor reasoning to defend abortion:
“If you don’t want an abortion, you don’t believe in it, [then] don’t have one. But don’t tell somebody else what they can do in terms of honoring their responsibilities,” Pelosi adds.
Slave-owners used the same argument: “If you don’t like slavery, don’t own slaves.” But of course both arguments make a major, unproven assumption, namely that another human being isn’t involved in the equation.
The most important thing to note is that I never said pro-choicers were pro-slavery. I merely pointed out that slave-owners used bad pro-slavery reasoning that ignored the humanity of the slaves, and pro-choicers who use similar reasoning are ignoring the humanity of the unborn. If people understand what I am saying there and are still offended, then I’m prepared to live with that.
It is a well documented fact that both pro-legalized abortion and pro-slavery people have used this type of reasoning on an extensive basis:
- “It is acceptable, because they aren’t fully human.”
- “If you don’t want one, don’t have one. Don’t impose your moral values on me.”
- “They are better off this way, otherwise they may be unwanted, poor or disabled.”
Slavery and abortion both deny the humanity and dignity of living human beings who have beating hearts and can feel pain.
Slavery was once legal in the United States, but it was always immoral. Abortion is currently legal, but it has always been immoral.
When one human being gets to decide whether an innocent human being has enough worth to live freely – or to live at all – profoundly bad things happen.