Was reading over a book about the Lincoln-Douglas debates and found this section to offer an incredible parallel to the abortion debate we’re having today:
Lincoln is quoted as saying, in response to Douglas’ arguments for the rights of southern states to own slaves:
“The doctrine of self government is right—absolutely and eternally right—but it has no just application, as here attempted. Or perhaps I should rather say that whether it has such just application depends upon whether a negro is not or is a man. If he is not a man, why in that case, he who is a man may, as a matter of self-government, do just as he pleases with him. But if the negro is a man, is it not to that extent, a total destruction of self-government, to say that he too shall not govern himself? When the white man governs himself that is self-government; but when he governs himself, and also governs another man, that is more than self-government—that is despotism. If the negro is a man, why then my ancient faith teaches me that ‘all men are created equal;’ and that there can be no moral right in connection with one man’s making a slave of another.”
In other words, Lincoln finds it perfectly fine for white men to do anything they want to black men, to treat them like property and not human beings, but only if they really are not human beings. If they are, according to Lincoln’s thinking, they cannot be treated as property. Similarly, pro-life proponents rest their argument on the scientific fact that the unborn is a living human being and the belief that human life is objectively valuable; whereas pro-choice arguments tend to treat the unborn as a part of the woman’s body, and thus as her property to do with as she pleases.
Lincoln continues:
Judge Douglas frequently, with bitter irony and sarcasm, paraphrases our argument by saying ‘The white people of Nebraska are good enough to govern themselves, but they are not good enough to govern a few miserable negroes!!'”
In other words, Douglas accused Lincoln of arguing that slave owning states are somehow morally deficient. As a parallel in the abortion debate, I might paraphrase the oft-made claim from pro-choicers that they “trust women to make decisions about their own body” and that pro-choice women “think carefully about their decision to abort.” Of course, these claims are irrelevant smokescreens, and the implied accusation that pro-lifers are sexist instead of simply concerned about human life is also a non sequitur. On the slavery issue, Lincoln was quick to point out the vacuousness of these types of arguments and bring the discussion back to the real issue at hand:
“Well I doubt not that the people of Nebraska are, and will continue to be as good as the average of people elsewhere. I do not say the contrary. What I do say is, that no man is good enough to govern another man, without that other’s consent.”
It seems that today we are still failing to reach consensus because we are having two different arguments. One side is arguing for the human rights of those who are considered disposable, and another is arguing for the right of privileged individuals to govern their own “property.”