Credit Attribution: Helga Esteb / Shutterstock.com

Scarlett Johansson Proclaims Abortion, a Human Right

Credit Attribution: Helga Esteb / Shutterstock.com

There is the loss of much when we over do something. It is not as special on Christmas when we get gifts if we receive them once a month. This is the same with words. As we widen a word to cover things that it used not to include, we stretch it out of proportion, and it losses its meaning.

This has happened with human rights. As I have argued, there is a problem with the way that we use the word rights. In our day, it can cover anything that you wish to do. If you want to sin and not have anyone say anything, then all you have to do is claim that it is a right.

This is the next way the left will try and keep their murder factories open.

Breitbart reports

Actress Scarlett Johansson says the right to abortion is not just a women’s rights issue, but also “a human rights issue.”

Speaking at the 2016 Power of Women Los Angeles luncheon Johansson – a longtime defender of Planned Parenthood – said the abortion business “has been under attack for many years now for…providing a safe place for legal abortions.”

“A women’s right to choose what to do with her body shouldn’t just be a women’s rights issue — it’s the year 2016, and this is a human rights issue,” the actress added, reports Variety.

Now, the issue is that Ms. Johansson is using the term wrongly. She is addressing the issue from a statist view. She thinks because it is a supposed to be a legal practice, then it is a right. But there are two problems that she does not seem to recognize.

First, if being legal or illegal determines rather or not something is a right, then before the states caved over Roe v. Wade, then Abortion was not a right. We know this because it was not legal.

This leads us to our second problem, Johansson’s understanding of rights means they are not permanent. Not only because their legality and illegality make them real or not real, but for another reason. If human rights are derived from the state or should derive from the state, then the state can at their whim deprive who they wish of those rights.

All we have to do is look at our prison system to see an example of this principle. Prisoners, after being convicted, are deprived of many of their rights. They are not at liberty to come and go as they please.  They cannot earn and spend money. They cannot enjoy the company of their wife and family. And even when they get out, if they are felons, they will live without the right to vote.

All because these are rights that we “receive” from the state.

This is a good reason we should not listen to actors when they hand out advise.

Please leave your comments below

Facebook Comments

Disqus Comments