In doing my research for this paper, I stumbled across the coldest take I have ever seen. This bitch is trying to say that the Dred Scott case and Roe v Wade show equal disregard for strict definitions of who counts as human under the protections of the constitution, and I tell you what I’m not fucking reading this shit.
Fuck these anti-abortion fake comparisons, I’m done.
Like! Listen to this shit this is in the abstract:
Both Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade erred not by engaging substantive moral questions but rather by denying, in different ways, the natural rights of human persons.
idk man but uhhh I seem to remember Roe v Wade having some science somewhere in there you fucking troglodyte what the fuck??
Also what is the natural “right” to an unwilling person’s body parts asdfdklgl
What a great fucking question! I tried reading some more but it just got messier like b u d d y. I cannot fathom how far up your own racist ass you have to be to even remotely entertain discussion that “yeah slaves are cool” is in any way equitable to “you have a right to an abortion” like???
Oh it’s one of anti-abortionists’ favorite comparisons, right up there with the Holocaust. I’ve never seen a human tragedy they don’t like to appropriate for their own agenda.
L.J.'s Obsessions 