Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) — In an amazing admission, pro-abortion Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg told a feminist group that the basis for legalized abortion should be changed from the so-called right to privacy to the anti-slavery provisions found in the Constitution.
I think she made a mistake. Surely she means the pro-slavery precedence from the Supreme Court such as the Dred Scott decision which is so much like Roe v. Wade.
- Declaring a person a non-person – check.
- Declaring that the non-person is property and that the owner can use their property as they please – check.
So-called abortion rights are all about dehumanization just as slavery was. Turn a person into a "tissue mass" or "product of conception" and you can do with them as you please. Just as the Dred Scott said "and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” The Supreme Courts problem with knowing who is a person is nothing new.
Of course there is one big difference between the evils of abortion and slavery. Slaves can be freed, aborted babies stay aborted.
But on other levels Justice Ginsburg idea is just plain wrong. She is basically saying that babies are slave owners who make pregnant women their slaves. So I guess abortion is just a slave revolt.