I don’t personally support slavery, but I can’t tell you what to do with your own property
From the Pen of Matt Walsh: http://themattwalshblog.com/2013/07/29/i-dont-personally-support-slavery-but-i-cant-tell-you-what-to-do-with-your-own-property/
I am repeating and linking to Matt Walsh, hoping you will read him. The words below are his.
* * * *
A few days ago I made the point that every single argument commonly made in support of abortion is directly parallel to arguments people used to make in defense of slavery. Naturally, this assertion was met with outrage and indignation by a bunch of avid abortion fans. Strangely, not a single one of them could exactly explain WHY my point was invalid, instead opting to whine about it without proffering an actual response. For their benefit, I thought I’d take the time to fully flesh out the comparison between pro-slavers and “pro-choicers.” Behold.
Arguments commonly made in support of slavery and abortion:
Appeal to privacy: “Well, I don’t personally endorse or condone slavery, but who am I to tell someone what to do with their own property?”
Appeal to privacy: “Well, I personally object to abortion, but who am I to tell someone what to do with their own body?”
Appeal to the superseding right: “My property rights come before the rights of a slave.”
Appeal to the superseding right: “My reproductive rights come before the rights of a fetus.”
Appeal to popular sovereignty: “States can decide for themselves if they want slavery. If a state doesn’t like slavery, they don’t have to have it.”
Appeal to personal sovereignty: “Don’t like abortion? Don’t have one.”
Appeal to inevitability: “Slavery has been around for thousands of years, it’s never going to go away. We might as well have a safe and legal system in place for it.”
Appeal to inevitability: “Abortion has been around forever, it’s never going to go away. We might as well have a safe and legal system for it.”
Appeal to faux-science: “Slaves aren’t really people. They aren’t like us. Look at them — they’re physically different, therefore we are human and they are not. They don’t have the same rights as white people.”
Appeal to faux-science: “Unborn babies aren’t really people: they’re fetuses. Look at them — they’re physically undeveloped. Therefore, we are fully human and they are not. They don’t have the same rights as born people.”
Appeal to economic concerns: “The economy relies on slavery. It would be a financial disaster if it ever came to an end.”
Appeal to economic concerns: “The tax base is strained already, most of these babies would end up on welfare. It would be a financial disaster if abortion came to an end.”
Appeal to the courts: “Slavery was vindicated by the Supreme Court in Dredd Scott. It’s already been decided, there’s no point in arguing it. Nine men in robes said that blacks are property, and so that settles it.”
Appeal to the courts: “Abortion was vindicated by the Supreme Court in Roe v Wade. It’s already been decided, there’s no point in arguing. Nine people in robes said that fetuses aren’t people, and so that settles it.”
Appeal to faux-compassion: “Slavery is in the best interest of Africans. They can’t function in the real world, they need to be protected and guided by the white man.”
Appeal to faux-compassion: “Abortion is merciful. These babies are unwanted. They would have a miserable life. Better to help them avoid it all together.”
Appeal to the Bible: “Slavery isn’t condemned in the Bible. If it’s wrong, Jesus would have specifically said so, but He didn’t.”
Appeal to the Bible: “Abortion isn’t condemned in the Bible. If it’s wrong, Jesus would have specifically said so, but He didn’t.”
There you have it. You’re free to jump onto the same ethical bandwagon as slavers and plantation owners, but you’re not free to hide from the reality of your own position. If you argue for abortion, everything you say on the subject is essentially a mad lib of what a 19th century slave owner would have said to defend his own favorite institution. This may be an inconvenient and upsetting reality, but it’s the reality all the same. Deal with it. But don’t cry about it. You chose to side with baby killing, now you must own it and everything that comes with it.
About John C Wright
John C. Wright is a practicing philosopher, a retired attorney, newspaperman, and newspaper editor, and a published author of science fiction. Once a Houyhnhnm, he was expelled from the august ranks of purely rational beings when he fell in love; but retains an honorary title.
