The idea that when it comes to the woman or the baby, the woman is superior, much like the White man considered himself superior to the Black man in 19th century America. We can find a parallel in the Dred Scott ruling, in which the Supreme Court said that the Black man has no rights that a White Man is bound to respect. In the same way, Canadian pro-aborts say that the unborn child has no rights that a woman is bound to respect. They think that the fact a woman is older, more developed and is carrying the baby, she is not bound to acknowledge any rights on behalf of the unborn child. So the woman has the right of life or death over her child, just like the White Supremacist thought he had the right of life or death over slaves or over Black people in general. Just like the Supremacists of old used “States’ Rights” and wifebeaters used the classical liberal idea of what goes on in man’s home is none of the government’s business, so they use the notion that what goes on in a woman’s body is no one’s business, even if we’re talking about the DEATH of a CHILD.They will try, in every way, to convince people IT’S NOT A CHILD. Except that even hardcore feminists acknowledge IT’S A CHILD.
Apparently, Suzanne has been able to rattle the cages of the feminists by posing some humdinger arguments. Good for her!
The problem with the pro-abortion crowd is that they are not into reality or common sense. They are into delusion and self denial of reality. They like to define away basic concepts and ideas that have their basis in objective reality like the natural law. This covers a whole host of terms like “human”, “pregnancy”, “murder”, “life”, etc. When you cannot even agree with your opponent on a common language of understanding, you might as well be at the Tower of Babble. It’s really a fruitless exercise. And it has some very scary implications for us all.
The pro-aborts’ abuse of the language has been able to further their leftist lunacy in re-defining marriage. They will continue their semantic jihad and re-define freedom i.e. as in social conservatives don’t have any. Case in point: the disgrace going on right now at Carleton University and their Student’s Association trying to ban pro-life groups from having a fair say in the abortion debate.
In her post above, Suzanne makes a very good point. The pro-aborts are really closet fascists, even if they don’t realize it. They put a so-called “woman’s right” to murder her unborn child over the rights of that child to be born, in effect putting one class of person over another. This is the kind of dangerous thinking that allows the modern 21st century depraved slave trading in women and children in parts of Asia to be a booming business. Why? Because once we accept the idea that one person is of inherently lesser value than another, all bets are off on how that is applied. In Asia, we can see where that is leading in terms of the trafficking of their own gender. Here in North America, the holy secular jihad against persons of an “age-disability” will move quickly from the unborn to the elderly. In time, we’ll have a nice little eugenic society where anarchy and might will rule, translating into an oppressive totalitarianism that will operate openly in “owning” certain classes of persons.