Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade

I read an interesting position paper against abortion tonight that prompted this post. The full article is here and from the magazine, "Salvo".

The article is a compare/contrast discussion between the Dred Scott case in the 1800's and Roe v. Wade in the 1900's. Dred Scott was a slave who left the pro-slavery South and while living in the North sued for his freedom. His case went to the Supreme Court where they found that he was property and not able to sue for his freedom...chattel have no rights. From a modern standpoint we find that offensive and archaic logic, absurd to the nth degree. Especially in the Obama saviouresque culture we currently reside in.

But stand the same Court's ruling on Roe v. Wade next to it now. A fetus is just property, not a life. Sad when comparing these cases that this is THE highest court in our land. I hope you read the full article, it's worth the time.

Here is an excerpt:

Injudicious Decisions?

The parallels between Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade go much deeper than the judgments themselves. From start to finish, the decisions share a similar logic, rationale, and verbiage, perhaps best observed through direct comparison. Following are some brief selections from both rulings. Decide for yourself whether these two Supreme Court cases are a package deal.

On Personhood:

Dred Scott
"A negro, whose ancestors were imported into this country, and sold as slaves . . . were not intended to be included under the word «citizens' in the Constitution, and can, therefore, claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States.”

Roe v. Wade
" The word «person,' as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn. . . .The unborn have never been recognized in the law as persons in the whole sense.”

On the Right to Privacy:

Dred Scott
A slave is the property of the master, and the Constitution has "provided for the protection of private property against the encroachments of the Government.”

Roe v. Wade
"This right or privacy . . . is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.”

On Historical Precedent:

Dred Scott
" That unfortunate race . . . had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order [and] they had no right which the white man was bound to respect.”

Roe v. Wade
" Abortion was practiced in Greek times as well as in the Roman Era. . . . Greek and Roman law afforded little protection to the unborn.”

On the Benefits to the Victim:

Dred Scott
"The negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit.”

Roe v. Wade
"There is also the distress for all concerned, associated with the unwanted child, and there is the problem of bringing a child into a family unable, psychologically, and otherwise to care for it.”