I often see the pro-life position presented as equivalent to anti-slavery. That is, it’s legal in some places, there are some who find it personally repugnant but defend the rights of others to rule themselves, but its absolute immorality means action must be taken to make it non-existent. Yes, there are those who use this argument while meaning many other things. I’m taking it on its face for the moment as it’s frankly the strongest argument the “pro-lifers” have.

The crux of the problem in this comparison is simple. Freed slaves could be separated from their putative masters and made independent. Fetuses, however, cannot be separated from their hosts.

The only complete solution to “protecting” the fetus is to enslave the host, the bearer, the woman carrying it. She must be denied any and all actions that might harm what she carries. She must, in short, be denied full citizenship for the period of her pregnancy if not longer.

This, then, is why I am pro-choice. I will not enslave another being. I will not help enslave another being. A blastocyst is not a person. A fetus is becoming a person, but is not yet a person. Unless and until the developing parasite is able to survive without its host it is not a person.