Comparing abortion rights to slaveholder rights
Copyright by Bob Rogers.
When the Supreme Court Dobbs decision of 2022 returned to the States the authority to decide their own policies on abortion, many observers noted that the last time we had such division among the United States was when we had “free” and “slave” States. Of course, both pro-life and pro-abortion leaders prefer to identify themselves with the “free” States.
The historical reality is that back then, both sides also saw themselves on the side of protecting their rights. Abolitionists wanted to protect the rights of slaves to be free, but slaveholders saw themselves as defending their rights to own slaves.
When Mississippi seceded from the Union, it published “A Declaration of Independence” which framed slave ownership in much the same way as modern abortion rights activists frame their claim to a right to abortion. Mississippi complained of how the abolitionist movement endangered their rights, saying, “it denies the right of property in slaves and refuses protection to that right… It has recently obtained control of the Government…We must either submit to degradation, and to loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union.”
Like it or not, slaveholders saw themselves as victims of having their rights stripped away. Even some of their Northern friends saw it that way. When Francis Wayland of Rhode Island wrote to slaveholders in the South, he said, “You will separate of course. I could not ask otherwise. Your rights have been infringed.”
The truth is that anybody can demand their rights; the real question is which right is greater. The so-called “right” to hold somebody in slavery violated the human right of that slave. Those who desire a right to abortion loudly shout, “My body, my choice.” However, the babies in the womb are unable to speak up about their bodies; they have no choice, unless somebody speaks up for their right to life. We must ask ourselves, which right is more important?