How can we ever forget this photograph? This photograph was taken by Michael Clancy for USA Today. This is the strongest photograph, that I know of, that shows that a child in the womb has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Although this photograph supports my world view of the sanctity of life from conception, there are those who support the idea that this child (fetus) does not have “Rights” until either the third trimester or until after the time of birth. America once thought in 1860 that 3,953,760 Slaves didn’t have “Rights” under the law either.
Most of us think of ourselves as an enlightened people. We tend to say that we think more clearly and open minded than did our predecessors. We have better insight vie science, technology, diverse cultural worldviews. We no longer have a geocentric view of the solar system or that alchemy is a legitimate science as did Newton. We don’t think women as property, stupid, or in a lower class or view. (I would say that there have been many who have never thought this including our second President, John Adams.) We have raised ourselves and our minds above all that foolishness. But I think we need to take a step back to review the topic of abortion in light of slavery.
America outlawed slavery through the 13th Amendment because we believe that no person should be the master over the rights and liberties of another person. Up to that time, slaves were viewed as property and thus were not “people.” This also apply to the question of the personhood of a Child in the womb. In short, does the fetus have equal protection under the law as people do now who weren’t viewed to have such before the 13th Amendment? So what is the difference between the question of personhood of the fetus and the personhood of the slave? Consider this about the fetus:
The Joyce from the Prochoice Action Network in her article “The Fetus Focus Fallacy” argues that a fetus is not a person because:
- The Fetus is dependent on a woman’s body to survive.
- The Fetus resides inside her body and thus she has the right to do with it as she pleases.
- The Fetus can have “eyes on stalks, notochords (instead of spines), fish-like gills, tails, downy fur, distorted torsos, spindly legs, giant heads, and alien-looking faces“
- The Fetal brain is not yet capable of conscious thought and memory.
In short, since the fetus is dependent and in the possession of the mother and does not resemble a “human being,” the fetus therefore is subject to the will of the mother. She also goes so far to say that “A fetus becomes a human being when the woman carrying it decides it does.”
Here are a few quotes from Civil Codes from Louisiana, South Carolina and Stroud’s Sketch during the times of slavery we need to consider:
“a slave is not capable of being injured;” he is a “chattel”—a “thing”—not a person
We are not told why the Slave is not a person but only that the Slave is a “thing” and thus has no rights. Since the Slave is in the possession of the Master, the Master may do with the slave as he likes. Just as, in the view of the pro-choice proponents, “abortion is unrelated to the status of the fetus – it hinges totally on the aspirations and needs of women” so it is with the relationship of the master and the slave. The treatment of the slave is of no consequence to the Master because the slave is the property of the owner.
Do you find this disturbing (as I do) how similar the arguments for abortion and slavery are? It seems that the Woman and Master are the same in that they have (through the actions of their own) obtained property to do with as they see fit. The Woman therefore, may either give birth and give the child up for adoption or choose to give power over to a doctor to abort and kill the Child. This choice is purely the prerogative of the Woman alone. It would be the same prerogative of the Master who decides to sell his slave or give another person charge over the slave to do as he or she pleases.The Woman and Master are not held liable for any treatment of either the Slave or the Child because the Woman and Master determine if the Child or Slave is a person.
I have two QUESTIONS:
- Does a woman have the right to have a doctor amputate her arms and legs because they are only parts of her body and not persons? If she has the right to abort a Fetus because it is under her control then why not her limbs?
- If a child has Right’s after birth then why doesn’t the child have Rights just before birth all the while having the same physiology and anatomy on both sides? Would it be possible for a 20yr old human being to not be viewed as a human on one side of a fence but on the other side be viewed as a human? Well, that was true when I came to waking on the soil of free States verses Slave States.
In America, we have a sense of justice that says that all wrongs must be righted once they are found to be as such. Although the Bill of Rights protected all persons in the United States, it took less than 100 years for America to gather all persons under those wings of protection.
Those who argue that the 13th Amendment does not include the Fetus will fail in their arguments just as those who argued for Slavery failed. The reason they will fail is because a Person does not evolve from cells into a Person just as the Slave did not evolve into a person when the 13th Amendment was signed. Also the Child and Slave do not become persons protected under the law through eminent domain but by the fact that the Child and Slave have always been, since conception, people protected under the law.
What say you concerning this?
{ 1 trackback }
{ 0 comments… add one now }