Premise: Wikipedia describes human rights as:
~They are commonly understood as inalienable fundamental rights “to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being,” and which are “inherent in all human beings” regardless of their nation, location, language, religion, ethnic origin or any other status. They are applicable everywhere and at every time in the sense of being universal, and they are egalitarian in the sense of being the same for everyone.~
Questions: Does the fetus fit the above definition? Is a fetus a “human being” which is “regardless of their … location” or “any other status” which is “applicable everywhere and at every time” and is “universal … in the sense of being the same for everyone”?
Conundrum: Creeple ardently believe that some human beings are subhuman and not protected by human rights, and convince many sheeple of the same.
[I suggest that you do not scoff this off – you may turn into a real evil monster.]
Explanation: The German Nazis viewed many people as subhuman – Jews and other minorities. These minorities were provided no human rights and were executed in the Holocaust. They were also forced to have abortions to kill their subhuman preborn babies. The slavers of early America also viewed minorities and most specifically blacks as subhuman, buying and selling them as slaves, doing whatever they wished with them, including torture, rape and execution. Today’s subhumanists are pro choice aborticide supporters and advocates. They view the preborn as subhuman and undeserving of human rights, subject to heinous execution methods that may include post-delivery execution. Today’s subhumanists also trade in body parts for profit, as if the preborn are nothing more than a commodity – sort of like slavers did. (At least the slavers kept their subhumans alive in their trading.)
Today’s pro choice (subhumanist) argument is a direct parallel to yesterday’s state’s rights argument. The Southern states (and Northern creeple supporters) argued that individual states had the right to categorize certain individuals (minorities) as subhuman and not worthy of any human rights. The pro choice subhumanist movement today demands the same state’s rights for women where they can decide whether their subhuman preborn is worthy of life or not, having no obligation to abide by human rights in regard to their preborn baby.
Conclusion: Pro-choice essentially means the choice to see the preborn as subhuman. When creeple claim it is a decision between a woman and her doctor, the decision they are referring to is whether to treat the preborn as human or subhuman. If the choice is subhuman, then no human rights are applied. In this sense this make makes the pro choice subhumanist no different than the Nazi or slaver subhumanist.