Wednesday, November 17, 2004

PETA, NARAL, and Roe v. Wade

Hypothesis: Members of PETA tend to hold NARAL-like views about abortion. If that's true, then those who profess to abhor almost any harm to animals -- even if the harm feeds humans or benefits medical science -- also tend to favor an almost-unbridled (perhaps totally unbridled) right to kill a living human fetus. In other words, I suspect that animals are more important than human fetuses in world of the fashionably left, as epitomized by PETA.

All of which is another way of saying that pro-abortion extremists have captured the moral low ground in the battle over abortion rights. As Jack Wheeler explains, in a piece at WorldNetDaily about "The beginning of the end of abortion",
...Confederate Southerners held many decent values – but on slavery they were morally wrong. No relativistic morals here, no "that's just your opinion" situational ethics, no wiggles, hesitations or qualifiers. Slavery is immoral, period – even the LibDems agree.

Thus the teachable moment – for abortion is morally no different than slavery, the claim that one human being may own another as personal property to be disposed of if the owner so chooses.

Thus we need to refer to abortion as "the peculiar institution," and Roe v. Wade as disgracefully unconstitutional as Dred Scott. Watch for this to happen. Watch for abortion advocates to be increasingly on the defensive as they are made to understand the moral equivalence between abortion and slavery....
If you're wondering how a libertarian can be against abortion, read here, here, and here.