Pro-Choice Terminology suggestion: Anti-choicers are really Pro-Slavery

[bunkerbuster1]

I've advocated on behalf of the term "Pro-Criminalization" since most people have a real serious problem with actually throwing women and their docs in jail for the "crime" of terminating a pregnancy.

But that hasn't caught on. Maybe it's too many syllables?

Just throwing this out there: I'd argue that those who call themselves "Pro-Life", who believe fertilized eggs are the equal of fully-formed human beings, and most importantly, who wish to force pregnant women to carry their pregnancies to term are really pro-slavery.

Being forced to behave as your master tells you, due to circumstances beyond your control{1}, sure sounds like slavery to me.

Also, it screws up one of these fuckheads' favorite talking points of late--their insane belief that the pro-criminalization movement is somehow morally equivalent to the abolitionist/anti-slavery movement of the 19th century. They'd have a harder time bringing up the Dred Scott decision as code-speak for bashing Roe v. Wade.

How about it?


___________
1. to lurking Freepigs--yes, many women who become pregnant really do so due to circumstances beyond their control. No birth control is 100% effective. So piss off.

[Crayson]

1. Government owns your body

In that case a woman doesn't own her body anymore.

Loosing control over the own body is the ultimate form of disenfranchisement. It basically stips you of ALL your rights.
When you don't have a body anymore, no rights apply.

[bunkerbuster1]

2. Funny how I hadn't even thought of the Government owning the body

but of course you're right.

I was thinking more in terms of the established theocratic goons having sway on a policy issue. Guess i'm too close to the issue or something.

BTW, might wanna fix that "Loosing" typo. What the pro-slavery folks are "loosing" upon us is a whole lot of repression of human rights.

[Katherine Brengle]

7. Very well said!

[bunkerbuster1]

3. Just one mornin' kick.

Even if you don't reply, please vote... I want to know if I'm out of bounds on this or not.

[noonwitch]

4. I don't think that's how anti-abortion people feel about it

1. They truly believe that life begins at conception. They further believe that babies born with disabilities are still children of God and deserving of a chance at the best life possible.

2. They wish that people wouldn't be irresponsible about sex, and that women wouldn't end up pregnant when they do not want to be pregnant.

3. They are concerned that women who have abortions will later have problems due to their actions. This isn't just the whole discredited study connecting cancer to abortions. It's about women who suffer guilt as a result-some do, some don't.

4. They feel that there are homes out there for babies who are not wanted by their biological parents.

5. They feel that legalized abortion cheapens life by making a society more callous about it.

I don't agree with them on whether abortion should be legal. I do agree with them that men and women should be more responsible about sex and am concerned that some women will feel guilt after having an abortion, and that for some women, that guilt could be overwhelming. On the 5th point, I'd have to say the average action movie or violent video game cheapens life, too.

[bunkerbuster1]

10. I have more respect for most of those five issues than you (or pro-lifers) might expect

and yes, I do distinguish between those who are devoutly pro-life and anti-abortion, but don't wish to criminalize abortion to accomplish their goals. I am fine with that.

Just one by one:

1. They truly believe that life begins at conception. They further believe that babies born with disabilities are still children of God and deserving of a chance at the best life possible.
I'm a little sick of hearing "life begins at conception." that's not "human life," as in a fully formed human, any more than a scab off an old bug bite is "human life." I do care about sentient life, and regard concern for all sentient life with the utmost respect. There is nothing sentient about a blastocyst. There's little sentient about a first trimester embryo, without a functioning nervous system.

And while I have a moral queasiness with the idea of aborting a fetus due to the presence of genetic flaws, I'm not going to impose that queasiness on others by forcing them to carry that pregnancy to term.

2. They wish that people wouldn't be irresponsible about sex, and that women wouldn't end up pregnant when they do not want to be pregnant.
There's nothing "irresponsible" about having sex, though, and if you have sex, there is a possibility of an unintended pregnancy. It's appalling that anyone would wish to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will.

3. They are concerned that women who have abortions will later have problems due to their actions. This isn't just the whole discredited study connecting cancer to abortions. It's about women who suffer guilt as a result-some do, some don't.
Here is where I completely part company. That issue comes down to choice, a choice we respect in all other human endeavors. Everyone has some regrets about what they've done; trying to legislate away the possibility of regret is idiotic.

4. They feel that there are homes out there for babies who are not wanted by their biological parents.
As an adoptive parent, I am very skeptical about this. By not making race an issue, we were able to adopt very quickly and rather painlessly. I don't want to knock those who hold out for a child that "looks like them," because it's all good, but the fact is there are thousands of kids who are shunted around the foster system for years and years. Why are there any, given that the pro-life movement is always barking "Adoption, not abortion!" Where are these pro-slavery folks?

5. They feel that legalized abortion cheapens life by making a society more callous about it.
I can see that, if you take out the word "legalized." I respect the goal of making abortion rarer, less necessary, though more responsible behavior--it's just that my idea of responsible behavior includes not just reserving sexual relations for someone you truly love, but also:

the responsibility for caregivers to provide accurate information to children about sex and reproduction;

the responsibility for society to provide affordable, unimpeded family planning services to all;

and the responsibility for politicians to keep religious beliefs (such as the idea that a fertilized egg has a "soul") out of policy decisions, even if it means pissing off a segment of your constituency.

[ceile]

14. Very well put.

I'm sick of the arguments from pro-lifers because every single one is hypocritical:
1. They may believe life begins at conception, but what happens to that life once it's born? I don't see them lining up to take care of the children- disabled or not.
2. Where is the man in this equation? No where! Women are the irresponsible ones who should be forced to carry their mistake.
3. They have absolutely NO CONCERN for the well being of the mother. If they did- they wouldn't spout false claims of abortion causing cancer and they wouldn't make her feel guilty about becoming pregnant in the first place (i.e. "crisis" pregnancy centers).
4. Homes for the unwanted children?! Puhleze! Go visit the local children's welfare/social services office and tell me if that's true. I don't see them lining up to adopt.
5. Wow. I didn't know society was becoming "callous" about a medical procedure. Come talk to me when they become callous about a tonsillectomy.
:sarcasm:

[noonwitch]

29. I am pro choice, but I also don't want to see the other side demonized

They do care about women and children, in their own paternalistic way. I disagree with them, but I recognize that abortion is not a good thing, it's a sadly necessary thing at times.

[MessiahRp]

64. They care about them until they are born...

Then they attack families by cutting funding for head start, funding for public education, school lunch programs, children's health insurance programs, energy assistance, food stamps and WIC and welfare programs and they oppose minimum wage increases while supporting mass outsourcing.

Then as that child becomes an adult they attempt to speed up their death by supporting the death penalty or endless wars that will force our children to die over the corporate greed of the oil companies.

Pro Life indeed.

Rp

[BlackVelvet04]

49. I think too often we all too easily

get drawn into issues concerning abortion that we would do better to ignore. I believe our argument should always be that anti-abortion laws are unconstitutional and anything else is just a matter of someone else's opinion.

[Tyler Durden]

13. There is a very, very simple answer to this whole issue.

If one does not believe in abortion for any of the myriad reasons....

DON'T HAVE ONE, and KEEP YOUR OPINIONS TO YOURSELVES.

This is an issue like and also of religion, and has NO PLACE (let met repeat that) NO PLACE in the body politic. This is EXACTLY the same thing as requiring or denying circumcision: it is a RELIGIOUS issue and has NO PLACE in the body politic.

I can even respect your opinion, but your opinion has no place regulating the behavior of my WIFE or my DAUGHTERS in regard to THEIR bodies.

Period.

DISCLAIMER: this is not aimed at you, unless it is part of your personal political agenda to restrict the right of any woman to the complete and total control of her own body.

[0rganism]

31. Unfortunately, that is a fundamentally unsatisfying answer

Try to look at it from the pro-forced-pregnancy point of view for a moment. They don't see abortion like circumcision at all, rather more like doctor-assisted murder. And they do have a point in that regard, as a fetus is not like other bodily organs or tumors which might need to be removed for several reasons, including but not limited to religious ones. A foreskin is not going to drop off by itself in 9 months to become a separate human. The pro-forced-pregnancy advocates genuinely believe that they are protecting human rights.

If you were an abolitionist in the 1850s, you probably wouldn't accept this argument from a slave owner:
"If one does not believe in slavery for any of the myriad reasons, DON'T OWN A SLAVE and KEEP YOUR OPINION TO YOURSELF. Your philosophy of liberating sub-humans -- who were justly sold, paid for, and kept -- is like and also of religion, and has NO PLACE in the body politic. I can even respect your opinion, but your opinion has no place regulating the behavior of my FAMILY or that of my NEIGHBORS in regards to OUR property and inheritance. Period."

Admittedly, it is an imperfect analogy. The claim to sovereign control of one's body carries much greater weight than that of one's personal property, and it is far easier (IMHO) to see evidence for the counterclaim of individual liberties denied with respect to a slave than a fetus. However, the basis for the argument is similar.

And that is why the answer you provide is inadequate with respect to resolving the debate, whether or not it has legal merit.

[Tyler Durden]

63. One simply cannot resolve this "debate."

A given. It isn't possible. You will not convert these people into those who are tolerant of the rights of others.

There is no resolution. I think I posted purely out of frustration.

[Scout]

15. at this point in time, I could not care LESS what anti-choice "people"

think of abortion rights.

[Madspirit]

22. ...and they are wrong

Anyone but ME controlling ME on that personal a level is pro-slavery. I don't care how they dress it up. The state has no rights in my uterus.

...and I will fuck everyone I see if I want. My sexual conduct is also no one else's business.

I have had an abortion and let me tell you.... :woohoo: ...I would have felt a whole lot worse if I had been forced to bear a child I did not want.
Lee

[liberalsoldier5]

30. You're celebrating your abortion?

My younger sister can't have children, and wants to adopt a child with her husband. Your openness about your abortion is just a little unusual and, well, disturbing. I mean no offense at all.

Having come from a pro-life family, I can fully assure you that people who are anti-choice are not as bad or in any way like those who were pro-slavery. Similarly, I frequently reassure my family that pro-choice people are not comparable to pro-slavery people. They often compare the "it is my property" argument of pro-choicers and slave owners. Simply put, there's a lot of misconceptions (no pun intended) on both sides of this argument.

As for me, in case you're wondering, I'm pro-choice until the baby has it's own skelaton and can feel pain. After that (which is around the 3rd trimester), I no longer believe the operation is just in a society like ours (and I'm thankful it's no longer an issue with PBA Act).

[bunkerbuster1]

32. the "PBA Act"?

the Policemen's Benevolent Association?

Surely you're not referring to that evil, despicable Public Law 108-105, HR 760, S 3, 18 U.S. Code 1531, passed and signed into law by Chimpy McFuckstain in 2003, are you?

Here are seven white guys yukking it up over their subjugation of women's rights. Ain't they a hoot?

If you really did mean the "Partial Birth Abortion" ban was a Good Thing, please defend this. This should be good.

[liberalsoldier5]

39. Yes, it's a good thing.

As I said, I'm pro-choice until the baby has it's own complete skeleton, can feel pain, and/or can survive outside the womb, which is around the third trimester. After this point, the operation is no longer affecting just the woman's body. In a society like ours, that particular operation should be (and is) considered barbaric and unjust. According to Gallup, only 10% of Americans believe that the operation should be legal. I'm in the majority, and I know MANY liberals and Democrats who agree with me. The only exceptions I'm in favor of are in the case of rape, incest, or if the mother's health or life are in danger.

And it's worth mentioning that the 4 people who convinced me to hold this position were all women (mom, 2 grandma's, and sister). It's not just "white men" who are thankful that partial-birth abortion is banned.

[Scout]

40. no such thing as "partial-birth abortion"

are you talking about third trimester abortions?
are you talking about a D&X?

there is no such procedure as a partial-birth abortion, so you really need to clarify what you are talking about.

and FYI, women do not get third trimester terminations on a "whim" and certainly not on a viable fetus.

[bunkerbuster1]

41. self-delete

(I was ranting for no discernible reason.)

[ChickMagic]

42. Sometimes the reason for D&X

is because amniocentesis can not be done until there is enough amniotic fluid. And sometimes the mother becomes extremely and dangerously hypertensive and could die if she carries to term. Sometimes the fetus is dead.

[liberalsoldier5]

43. I did not know that.

I might have to do some extra researching.

[ChickMagic]

47. Yeah

After the amniocentesis and waiting for the results, a woman might well have crossed into the 3rd trimester. If it shows extreme malformation and the baby would suffer terribly if brought to term, a D&X is probably the most humane thing to do. I believe the fetus does not feel pain until about 6 weeks prior to birth. The neural pathways are just not there yet.

[bunkerbuster1]

50. I apologize for my harsh tone, earlier.

I'm not looking to pick fights in here, and I realize my post in response to you wasn't very constructive.

If you're willing to do some research, here is an account of such procedures:

http://archive.salon.com/mwt/feature/2002/07/24/late_term/index.html

[BlackVelvet04]

53. Why do you find it disturbing?

Should she live in shame and keep it all hush hush? There's a saying....'You're as sick as your secrets."

I think there is an underlying sense of shame that many liberals feel about being pro-choice. I often see posts from liberals that state "I would never have an abortion, but I support a woman's right to choose." I think that's just crap...I think any woman can find herself in circumstances under which she would have an abortion. And I think liberals really need to examine themselves and decide what they really believe.

I also see a lot of posts saying "I support a woman's right to choose but I think abortions should be rare." Why is that? Either you believe there is nothing fundamentally wrong with abortion or you don't.

[bunkerbuster1]

55. I'll go so far as to say that I can respect the desire to make abortion rarer

But for me, the way to achieve that goal is through better access to and information about contraception.

I don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with abortion. I do think it's preferable not to have an unintended pregnancy, though, don't you?

[BlackVelvet04]

58. Certainly.....

I just think that many people have very conflicted feelings and opinions about abortion. That doesn't make them bad.....just conflicted.

[Madspirit]

56. The Celebration

I do think anti-choice is comparable to slavery. As Ginsberg said. If the state controls our bodies, we are chattel. "Chattel" is a form of slavery.

My celebration that you found unsettling:

Truth: The celebration was about having my life back. I do celebrate that. My abortion did make me sad but not nearly as sad as having a baby I did not want and could not have cared for, would have made me. In the exact same circumstances, I would do the exact same thing.

They did not outlaw PBA, just btw. They only outlawed a particular procedure for doing it.

Personally, I consider it alive from the time it is conceived but it is not an independent life. I don't care if it's a complete human, if it has to crawl inside MY body, to live, it's living or not, should be up to me. I am not a incubator. I am not a slave. I am not breeding cattle. That said, I would have a hard time with any woman who would choose a last trimester abortion for anything except medical reasons...personally. I even once quit being friends with someone who had four abortions, first trimester, just because she was too fucking lazy to bother to use birth control and she was rich enough to have an abortion any time she wanted. I thought that was a frivolous way to look at life.

We are forced into being very one-dimensional about it because what we do with our bodies is, for some reason, up to other people to decide. It shouldn't be something voted on or not. It should be like in Canada. It is simply our right because it is our body. It is a privacy right and a freedom right. The fetus has no rights because it requires the woman's body to live.

Lee

[BlueJazz]

5. If I were a Woman, everytime somebody wanted to control my Body, I'd....

...attack them (verbally) like a Staving Lion given a 20LB steak.

Screw these Pricks....They can take their "Cutsy-Wutsy" terms like Save Our Children
and stick it where the Sun don't shine. :mad:

[Katherine Brengle]

6. Having carried a pregnancy to term, I can stand beside you on this one --

even wanting it 100%, it was incredibly difficult to get through. I don't think I could have made it through sane if I was forced.

[Norquist Nemesis]

18. Or on the flip side, if you were forced into an abortion

Either way, decisions to abort should not be in the hands of the government

[blogslut]

8. Go for it but I'll stick with George Carlin's term

They're not pro-life, they're anti-women.

[bunkerbuster1]

12. Most, perhaps, but not all.

And I think it might be something of a tactical mistake to frame it that way, although I do agree that a large part of the pro-criminalization movement has to do with keeping women down and in a world of shit.

[Chemical Bill]

9. Those kids get their sustanance from the mother's blood.

Isn't there some kind of vampire thing we can work into the debate? I mean, if a woman wants to have a child, great, but if she doesn't want someone sucking her blood (I know, not technically correct, but still), she should have some say in it.

Bill

[bunkerbuster1]

11. The term you want is "parasitic."

Technically, the fetus is a parasite.

But I really don't think we want to work that into a mainstream debate. One on one, if you want to push someone's button, it might come in handy. JMHO.

[TahitiNut]

16. Subjugation and subordination, maybe. "Slavery" demeans the abomination of real slavery.

Clearly, subjugation and subordination of women is despicable and the violation of the personal privacy of one's own body appalling ... but we should really maintain SOME perspective regarding the "levels of Hell."

[Madspirit]

21. Ginsberg compared it to slavery

Women are not chattel. The state has no place in my uterus.
Lee

[bunkerbuster1]

23. Best argument against so far.

I'm not completely convinced, but that is a very valid point. I don't want to cheapen what was a uniquely dark chapter in our history.

[Madspirit]

24. It's Ok if it's women but not Ok if it's blacks?!

Even Ruth Ginsberg compared it to slavery. Women are not chattel and if the state tried to compel me to have a baby I did not want, under threat and by law, what the hell else would it be but slavery?! My uterus does not belong to the fucking government. Or to any god. Or even to my SO. My uterus is mine. If the state in any way interferes with that, it is a form of slavery.
Lee

[bunkerbuster1]

25. Whoa!

Of course it's not ok if it's women! Geez, you think women weren't enslaved prior to the end of the American Civil War?

I'm just saying that the role America played in the slave trade and the bondage of human beings does deserve to be recognized, and that using the term "slavery" to describe something outside of that era should never be done lightly. That's all.

[Madspirit]

27. ...and I'm not doing it lightly

When the government controls your body, that's slavery. Ginsberg said the same thing.
Lee

[TahitiNut]

28. Hyperbole. "The draft is slavery!" "Taxation is slavery!" "Employment is wage-slavery!"

While a 'comparison' can be drawn for purposes of discussion of principles insofar as subjugation and subordination to the will of another is concerned, claiming it's the same thing is hyperbole - and dismissive of the greater atrocity that is and was slavery.

This in NO WAY condones anti-choice. In my personal opinion, Roe v. Wade erred in presuming the state had ANY sovereignty whatsoever. I don't personally believe the state has ANY legitimate interest, even in the "third trimester." Nonetheless, the hyperbole is a disservice to the interests of pro-choice advocacy, imho.

[Madspirit]

34. Take it up with Ginsberg

She referred to it as "chattel slavery" in a 2002 dissent with the court. Being owned by the state IS slavery. The state controlling MY body is the same as owning it.

Lee

[TahitiNut]

37. Since you're so sure she said it, what she said, and when she said it, how about a link?

I find no SCOTUS dissenting opinions in which this is argued or such words are used. I'd like to see the context.

Here's a list of the 2002 cases in which she expressed an opinion ...

2002 Term

Abdur'Rahman v. Bell
Voted with the majority

American Insurance Association v. Garamendi
Voted with the minority, authored a dissent

Archer v. Warner
Voted with the majority, joined Breyer's opinion

Barnhart v. Peabody Coal Co.
Voted with the majority, joined Souter's opinion

Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson
Voted with the majority, joined Stevens' opinion

Black & Decker Disability Plan v. Nord
Voted with the majority, joined Breyer's opinion

Boeing Co. v. United States
Voted with the majority, joined Stevens' opinion

Branch v. Smith
Voted with the majority, joined Scalia's opinion

Breuer v. Jim's Concrete
Voted with the majority, joined Souter's opinion

Brown v. Legal Foundation of Washington
Voted with the majority, joined Stevens' opinion

California Franchise Tax Board v. Hyatt
Voted with the majority, joined O'Connor's opinion

Chavez v. Martinez
Voted with the minority, authored a dissent, joined Kennedy's dissent

City of Cuyahoga Falls v. Buckeye Community Hope
Voted with the majority, joined O'Connor's opinion

Clackamas Gastroenterology v. Wells
Voted with the minority, authored a dissent

Clay v. United States
Voted with the majority, authored an opinion

Connecticut Dept. of Public Safety v. Doe
Voted with the majority, joined Souter's concurrence

Cook County v. United States ex rel. Chandler
Voted with the majority, joined Souter's opinion

Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.
Voted with the majority, joined Scalia's opinion

Demore v. Kim
Voted with the minority, joined Souter's dissent

Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa
Voted with the majority, joined Thomas' opinion

Dole Food Co. v. Patrickson
Voted with the majority, joined Kennedy's opinion

Dow Chemical Company v. Stephenson
Voted with the majority

Eldred v. Ashcroft
Voted with the majority, authored an opinion

Entergy Louisiana, Inc. v. Louisiana Public Service Comm.
Voted with the majority, joined Thomas' opinion

Ewing v. California
Voted with the minority, joined Stevens' dissent, joined Breyer's dissent

FCC v. Nextwave Communications, Inc.
Voted with the majority, joined Scalia's opinion

Federal Election Commission v. Beaumont
Voted with the majority, joined Souter's opinion

Fitzgerald v. Racing Association of Central Iowa
Voted with the majority, joined Breyer's opinion

Ford Motor Co. v. McCauley

Georgia v. Ashcroft
Voted with the minority, joined Souter's dissent

Gratz v. Bollinger
Voted with the minority, joined Souter's dissent, authored a dissent

Green Tree Financial Corp. v. Bazzle
Voted with the majority, joined Breyer's judgment of the court

Grutter v. Bollinger
Voted with the majority, authored a concurrence

Hillside Dairy Inc. v. Lyons
Voted with the majority, joined Stevens' opinion

Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.
Voted with the majority, joined Breyer's opinion

Inyo County v. Paiute-Shoshone Indians
Voted with the majority, authored an opinion

Jinks v. Richland County
Voted with the majority, joined Scalia's opinion

Kentucky Assoc. of Health Plans, Inc. v. Miller
Voted with the majority, joined Scalia's opinion

Lawrence and Garner v. Texas
Voted with the majority, joined Kennedy's opinion

Lockyer v. Andrade
Voted with the minority, joined Souter's dissent

Madigan v. Telemarketing Associates
Voted with the majority, authored an opinion

Massaro v. United States
Voted with the majority, joined Kennedy's opinion

Meyer v. Holley
Voted with the majority, joined Breyer's opinion

Miller-El v. Cockrell
Voted with the majority, joined Kennedy's opinion

Moseley v. V Secret Catalogue, Inc.
Voted with the majority, joined Stevens' opinion

National Park Hospitality Assn. v. Dept. of the Interior
Voted with the majority, joined Thomas' opinion

Nevada Dept. of Human Resources v. Hibbs
Voted with the majority, joined Rehnquist's opinion

Nguyen v. United States
Voted with the minority, joined Rehnquist's dissent

Nike, Inc. v. Kasky
Voted with the majority, joined Stevens' concurrence

Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Ayers
Voted with the majority, authored an opinion

Overton v. Bazzetta
Voted with the majority

PacifiCare Health System v. Book
Voted with the majority, joined Scalia's opinion

Pharmaceutical Research v. Walsh
Voted with the majority, joined Stevens' opinion, joined Stevens' concurrence

Pierce County v. Guillen
Voted with the majority, joined Thomas' opinion

Price v. Vincent
Voted with the majority, joined Rehnquist's opinion

Roell v. Withrow
Voted with the majority, joined Souter's opinion

Sattazahn v. Pennsylvania
Voted with the minority, authored a dissent

Scheidler v. National Organization for Women (NOW)
Voted with the majority, authored a concurrence

Sell v. United States
Voted with the majority, joined Breyer's opinion

Smith v. Doe
Voted with the minority, authored a dissent

Sprietsma v. Mercury Marine
Voted with the majority, joined Stevens' opinion

State Farm Mutual Auto Ins. Co. v. Campbell
Voted with the minority, authored a dissent

Stogner v. California
Voted with the majority, joined Breyer's opinion

Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. v. Henson
Voted with the majority, joined Rehnquist's opinion

United States v. American Library Association
Voted with the minority, joined Souter's dissent

United States v. Bean
Voted with the majority, joined Thomas' opinion

United States v. Navajo Nation
Voted with the majority, authored an opinion

United States v. Recio
Voted with the majority, joined Breyer's opinion

United States v. White Mt. Apache Tribe
Voted with the majority, authored a concurrence

Virginia v. Black
Voted with the majority, joined Souter's special concurrence

Virginia v. Hicks
Voted with the majority, joined Scalia's opinion

Washington Dept. of Social & Health Services v. Guardianship of Keffeler
Voted with the majority, joined Souter's opinion

Wiggins v. Smith
Voted with the majority, joined O'Connor's opinion

Woodford v. Garceau
Voted with the minority, joined Souter's dissent

Yellow Transportation, Inc. v. Michigan
Voted with the majority

[BlackVelvet04]

54. I think it is more accurate

to use the term involuntary servitude (which is also unconstitutional.)

[Mushroom]

62. You're correct about keeping perspective...

it's really a holocaust for female human beings.

[Norquist Nemesis]

17. "Pro-Choice is Anti-Government"

or "Anti-Abortion equals Government Mandate"
or "Keep the Choice out of Government"
or "Choosing Life is not a Government Mandate...Keep it that way"
or...

[Madspirit]

19. Ruth Bader Ginsberg also compared it to slavery

Ginsberg also compared it to slavery. Women are not chattel and the state cannot compel US to have children.
Lee

[Madspirit]

20. k&r

How can anyone think the state controlling my reproductive organs is anything but slavery. Only idiots and creeps would think otherwise, imo.
Lee

[Az]

26. If I plugged an IV into your arm you would have the right to take it out

Even if it meant my death. I do not have the right to use your body even if my survival is in question.

[slackmaster]

33. No, most of them are very sincerely concerned about the humanity of fertilized eggs

They wish to control womens' sexuality so they don't get pregnant, not force them to bear unwanted children.

[ChickMagic]

46. However

Some of these same people will deny women birth control or emergency contraception.

[slackmaster]

59. Yes, but they do so out of concern for the life or "soul" of the zygote or blastocyst

I've discussed it with a few of them at length. "Enslaving" the woman is absolutely not their intent.

My own view is that as with many other rights, the right to life is earned in stages.

You can't consent to sex until (fill in age here).

You can't vote until you are 18.

You can't drink alcohol until you are 21.

You can't run for the House of Representatives until you are 25, or the Senate until you are 30, etc.

But the "brave defenders of fertilized eggs" as someone on DU once quipped, sincerely believe that the right to life is earned in toto at the moment a genetically unique individual comes into existence, and that right trumps the woman's right to not use her body for that particular purpose.

[ChickMagic]

65. There are so many spontaneous abortions

I suppose that makes God the biggest abortionist of all. Do they not feel queasy about forcing a woman to carry a child of rape or incest? Is she merely an incubator?

[ComerPerro]

35. "pro-life" people call pro-choice people supporters of slavery already

as in, the fetus is the slave

[bunkerbuster1]

36. Which is why I'd like to throw it back in their face

Having a majority of Americans on our side certainly helps. We need to turn this debate around, and remind all that the pro-slavery, pro-criminalization side is really a fringe group. Most people don't support putting women and their docs in jail. Most Americans don't want Roe overturned.

But I don't think most Americans realize this.

[Madspirit]

38. Ginsberg

(The last time I tried to find the quote where she actually used the world "chattel" it took about three hours for me to find it because it was a statement she made when first getting on the court. If you don't take my word for it, fine, I will, when I have time, hunt it down again. Still, the below quote seems sufficient as to her intent, imo. Let me know if you still need me to find the damned exact quote. I will do it....Lee)

Senator Hank Brown: equal rights for men and women on the question of abortion.

Ginsburg: I will rest my answer on the Casey decision, which says in the end it’s her body, her life, and men - to that extent - are not similarly situated. They don’t bear the child.

Brown: the rights of men and women are not equal in this case.

Ginsburg: I said on the equality side of it, that it is essential to a woman’s equality with man that she be the decision-maker, that her choice be controlling. If you impose restraints, you are disadvantaging her because of her sex.. The state controlling a woman would mean denying her full autonomy and full equality.

[LanternWaste]

44. Great....

Great. I'll tell my sweet, old mother (who is not pro-choice) that she tolerates, condones and probably wishes in her heart for slavery. That maybe she'd be better off nursing a mint julip in the ante-bellum south. Damn.

Hey, I've an idea. Why not come up with a name for everyone in the world who doesn't agree with the democratic platform 100%. Dunderheads, idiots? How about fucktards?

Because it's easier to vilify someone whose name we don't know. (By the way, her name is Donna, but you can use your pro-slavery epithet instead as it describes her sooo well :sarcasm: )

[bunkerbuster1]

52. If your "sweet, old mother" wants to throw women and docs in jail

for terminating a pregnancy? She's wrong.

[Madspirit]

60. There are MANY Blacks, including my MANY friends

Who consider anti-choice the same as slavery. If YOU don't control YOUR body, if the state controls YOUR body...what the fuck else is it!
Lee

[ChickMagic]

45. I worked with a woman from Romania

Under Ceausescu women were required to submit to blood tests every month to determine if they were pregnant. If they were, and the next month's blood test turned out negative, they were determined to be criminals because they had abortions (whether or not they had miscarriages). They were forced to carry to term regardless of the harm it might have caused to the mother. Once Ceausescu was hanged, one of the first things reinstated in Romania was the right to an abortion. That told me volumes.

[BlackVelvet04]

48. I think it would be more accurate to use the language of the

13th Amendment and call it involuntary servitude.

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Main Entry: ser·vi·tude
Pronunciation: 's&r-v&-"tüd, -"tyüd
Function: noun

1 : a condition in which one lacks liberty especially to determine one's course of action or way of life
2 : a right by which something (as a piece of land) owned by one person is subject to a specified use or enjoyment by another

Abortion laws are a violation of the 13th Amendment. To deny a woman the right to an abortion takes away her liberty to determine her own course of action or way of life and basically claims her uterus for the government's specified use of bearing a child.

[alcibiades_mystery]

51. Eh...whatever

All this terminology spinning is more hooey than anything else.

[ismnotwasm]

57. Hell yes

Forcing a human being to carry a fetus to term is tantamount to slavery. Your body is not your own. You can't choose. You are considered a criminal for making a different choice, and may have to go underground. Even in the face of assualts on your own body, as in rape, there are those who think you have no choice, no control, no rights.

[Mushroom]

61. Medical Behavior...

justification for more violence against women. The anti-choice mob/lawmakers want to be in control of women's mortality just like the punk who plots in his big yellow pad the demise of his female school mates. They want to make bad choices for women, they don't want women having the freedom to choose for themselves, they are predators.