Monday, July 27, 2009

Lincoln and Obama, Slavery and Abortion

JT:
Jeffrey Anderson and Darren Guerra recently argued that President Obama is more in step with Stephen Douglas and John C. Calhoun than with Abraham Lincoln. An excerpt:
There are significant parallels between these two issues. Each is likely the political or moral issue about which Americans of their era have, or had, the most passionate feelings and the strongest opinions. Each was ultimately decided, at least for a while, by the Supreme Court — in favor of legalized slavery and legalized abortion. And each involves conflicting interpretations of fundamental natural rights — of liberty versus property in the case of slavery, of life versus liberty in the case of abortion. . . .

Both slavery and abortion ultimately reduce to competing claims over unalienable rights. No one can justly take the liberty or life of another if that other qualifies for the rights with which all of humanity is endowed. Thus, debates over slavery eventually became — as debates over abortion eventually become — debates over the humanity of the slave or the fetus. If the slave or the fetus are among those beings who, in the words of the Declaration of Independence, “are created equal” and “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,” then their unalienable rights to life (in the case of abortion) and liberty (in the case of slavery) must be secured. If they are not, then a slave-master may be said to have a right to property in a slave, and a pregnant woman may be said to have a right to liberty in the form of abortion.

Read the whole thing (but note that it's two pages, not one--it's hard to tell from the design on their page).

HT: Gene Veith

3 comments:

Unknown said...

This article, like almost all others on the topic fails to address the complexity of the issue and falls back on painting it in black and white, almost literally. I'm not a fan of abortion, but you could just as easily compare the rights of women to the rights of slaves and make an opposite, but equally vapid argument for abortion rights.
The first step in making a stupid argument is failing to understand or address what the other side thinks about the issue. This is almost universal among pro-choice and pro-life camps. The pro-life camp actually cares about the life of the baby and thinks that the pro-choice camp is a bunch of uncaring murderers. The pro-choice camp actually cares about the rights of women, don't consider the fetus to be a human with human rights, and generally don't actually enjoy the idea of abortion but support the right for women to make that choice. They think the pro-life camp is out to stifle women's rights, put them in their place and force their religious beliefs on everyone else. Both camps have good intentions, and both camps completely misunderstand and vilify the other.
Painting abortion as a simple human rights issue is ignorant and careless.

Vitamin Z said...

Steve,

Do you think slavery was a "simple" human rights issue?

If it was legal to kill 2 month old babies would it need to move beyond a simple human rights issue?

z

Professor McConnell said...

I think the argument that modern abortion law is like 19th century slavery law is true. The two are quite parallel. I have writen about it on my own blog ina post on "when American Law Went South." The idea that we can define who is and who is not human as a matter of law to serve our social interests and desires is a dangerous one. Philosopher Hadley Arkes ahs also argued about how Lincoln's argument against slavery parallels an argument agains abortion.