New Terms to Clarify the Essence of the Central Dispute of Our Time:
Where do you stand on the current Human Rights for All Humans debate? Do you believe in equal Human Rights for All Humans, or do you believe Human Rights can and should be denied to some humans? That is, are you “Pro-Human-Right-to-Live” or “Pro-Choice-to-Kill-Humans” ?
In order to clarify all future dialogue on human life issues in a way which keeps all the facts of the history of Human Rights and abortion in mind, I have clarified the essence of the “Pro-Life” versus “Pro-Choice” abortion debate by re-naming it the “Pro-Human-Right-to-Live” versus “Pro-Choice-to-Kill-Humans” abortion debate; or alternatively the Human Rights for All Humans debate, wherein “Pro-Lifers” believe in equal Human Rights for All Humans, but “Pro-Choicers” believe that Human Rights are NOT for all humans, but Human Rights can be denied to some humans (as “Pro-Choicers” deny equal Human Rights to young, preborn humans; as slave-owning bigots denied equal Human Rights to Black humans; as Nazi bigots denied equal Human Rights to Jewish and handicapped humans). There is no intellectually honest way for anyone to deny that these terms clearly and accurately identify the core essence of the dispute: self-described “Pro-Life” citizens are essentially motivated by the core belief that every human has an Inherent Human Right to Live (which is the core of the now-clearly-identified Foundational Principles of Human Rights and Democracy described in Articles 1-5 of the Pledge); and since Human Rights are for All Humans (or else they are meaningless, if being human is not enough to have them), therefore the abortion-killing of humans should be banned (as it was by law or custom since 318 AD). And no-one can honestly deny that the key defining factor that distinguishes self-described “Pro-Choice” citizens from “Pro-Life” or “Pro-Human-Right-to-Live” or Human Rights for All Humans citizens is that “Pro-Choice” citizens are instead indeed essentially “for” (Latin pro) the choice to kill young humans still in the womb by legal abortion (therefore logically denying the Inherent Human Right to Live which essentially defines the “Pro-Life” side, because “Pro-Choicers” do NOT believe in Human Rights for All Humans). “Pro-Choice” citizens by definition are essentially “for” the “choice” to kill preborn humans whose full biological, scientific humanity as unique living individual biological human organisms with absolutely unique human DNA utterly distinct from their parents at every age and stage of their human life-cycles from zygotes (fertilized eggs) to senior adults is not in dispute but is established scientific fact. By approving abortion and calling it “Choice,” “Pro-Choice” citizens are essentially “for” the “choice” to kill humans just like every one of us when the we were their age and still in the womb, logically meaning that if they and we could have been legally aborted, NONE OF US HAVE A LEGALLY RECOGNIZED INHERENT HUMAN RIGHT TO LIVE. I believe that these new terms “Pro-Human-Right-to-Live” versus “Pro-Choice-to-Kill-Humans” which definitively clarify the true core essence of the “Pro-Life” versus “Pro-Choice” abortion debate as the Human Rights for All Humans debate, should help resolve the conflict over abortion quickly because it takes away the “Pro-Choice” side’s ability to (with intellectual dishonesty) pretend that the “bottom line” of “Pro-Choice” philosophy is anything else. Anything else such as “reproductive rights” which only sound good until one realizes these logically can only exist instead of the Human Rights which they replace. IF “women rights” somehow go beyond the equal Human Rights to safety and so on which everyone else shares, and include a right to kill humans by abortion, THEN logically humans do NOT have any Inherent Human Right to Live after all. A woman with the legal “reproductive right” to kill her own human child, herself has no legally recognized Inherent Human Right to Live since her own mother could have legally killed her when she herself was in her own mother’s womb. But the Inherent Human Right to Live, as shown in Democracy 101 & The Pledge of Allegiance to Democracy, is the core of the historical and logical Foundational Principles of Human Rights and Democracy. Terms like “reproductive rights” and “women’s rights” are merely insubstantial “smoke and mirrors,” NOT legitimate terms to define the abortion debate, since they are calculated to distract attention from the much higher priority issue of genuine Human Rights which are obviously violated by legal abortion.
Since abortion is still legal only because the majority of Western citizens are not actually ardently either “Pro-Life” or “Pro-Choice,” but “in the middle” (usually leaning in one direction or the other but without serious political commitment to either changing or keeping the legal abortion status quo), I hope that these clarifying new terms of “Pro-Human-Right-to-Live” versus “Pro-Choice-to-Kill-Humans,” which no-one can reasonably deny capture the core essence of the abortion dispute, will assist the “majority somewhere in the middle” to actually realize just what they are and are not supporting by their relative uninvolvement and inaction one way or the other in the abortion dispute, and I hope these new terms will motivate them to become educated enough to take the side of equal Human Rights for All Humans which is the only side that supports the Foundational Principles of Human Rights and Democracy so that they can last forever. Because without recognizing this, we are literally losing our democracies to “Creeping Totalitarianism.”
I am a father of six wonderful children, and with my “dear Bride” (their mother) I consider that these children have an Inherent Human Right to Live, as do I and every human, and in Democracy 101 & The Pledge of Allegiance to Democracy I have demonstrated that this recognition is in fact the historical and logical foundation of all other Human Rights and democratic freedoms. Thus I consider that no government has legitimate authority to legally cancel the Inherent Human Right to Live by giving mothers the “licence to kill” their young human children still in the womb, through de-criminalizing the abortion-killing of young humans, which governments only do if they are either evil (like the totalitarian Soviet and Nazi governments which were the first two national governments to de-criminalize abortion), or if they are too ignorant and uneducated to even know that they were following the evil totalitarian Soviet and Nazi precedent when they de-criminalized abortion; or too ignorant and uneducated (like the Soviets and Nazis) to even know that killing humans is wrong. Governments that are not actually evil and totalitarian would surely only follow the totalitarian Soviet and Nazi precedent of de-criminalizing abortion if they are too ignorant and uneducated to know that the West took exceptional steps in 1948 to ensure Nazi-like human-killing (which included de-criminalized human-killing by abortion and euthanasia) never happened again, brilliant human-life-and-freedom-affirming steps they have overturned with their de-criminalizing abortion and euthanasia (like the Nazis did) anyway; or too ignorant and uneducated to know that modern Western Human Rights and freedoms only became possible as soon as the abortion-killing of humans was first criminalized in 318 AD specifically because at that time the West learned (from Christianity) that killing humans is wrong and since then Western governments no longer considered that human life was cheap, to serve a greater State which decided which human lives could be killed and when; but human life was equally precious (from the womb), and therefore the State was since then OBLIGATED to protect (and eventually serve) always-precious human lives. Therefore, such ignorant and uneducated democratic governments should never have followed the precedent of the evil Soviet and Nazi totalitarian governments by de-criminalizing the abortion-killing of young humans, which legally eliminates the Inherent Human Right to Live, the original legal recognition of which made Democracy even possible.
© 2016, 2017 William Baptiste SFO