TITLE: NARAL: Comparing Abortion to Slavery ‘Shameful & Vile’
SENTENCE 1: African pro-life activist Obianuju Ekeocha retweeted the NARAL message, saying she wanted to preserve the comment for posterity, “so that one day long after we are dead, there will be records of the inhumane sentiments that held up abortion.”  I’m leaving this comment here so that one day long after we are dead, there will be records of the inhumane sentiments that held up abortion https://t.co/34BpZ9c7i6 — Obianuju Ekeocha (@obianuju) August 5, 2017  Abortion, like slavery in America, targets the black community in a particular way, and has been decried by countless black leaders as racist in its very roots.
SENTENCE 2: “Don’t black lives matter?”  In their letter, the leaders noted that the rate of abortion among blacks is far higher than among whites, with “365 black babies aborted for every 1,000 that are born.”  “Blacks account for roughly 38% of all abortions in the country though we represent only 13% of the population,” they said, citing statistics that underscore the heavily racist component of abortion in America.
SENTENCE 3: “Thus they hold that the individual’s freedom to murder nascent human offspring is an indispensable prerogative of American citizenship, which must be protected with the coercive force of law.”  In its internal logic, Keyes said, this is “identical to what the proponents of race-based slavery said about the freedom of their communities and states.”  Alveda King, the niece of civil rights champion Rev.

Bias label: highly
Annotator rationales:
If you highlight the act of preserving the comment as significant without addressing the broader context, then you risk emphasizing an ideological stance over an objective discussion
If you describe support for abortion as being upheld by inhumane sentiments, then you risk framing a complex debate in absolute moral terms, potentially alienating opposing perspectives.
If you claim abortion actively “targets” a racial group without evidence of intent, then you risk suggesting a coordinated attack rather than analyzing broader social and economic factors.


If you compare abortion to slavery, then you risk equating two vastly different historical and ethical contexts in a way that oversimplifies both issues.
If you present statistics without context (such as access to healthcare, socioeconomic disparities, or personal choice), then you risk implying a direct causal link between race and abortion rates.
If you contrast these numbers without explaining contributing factors, then you risk leading readers to draw conclusions about racial targeting without considering systemic inequalities.
If you use the term “murder” instead of medically neutral language term, then you are presenting an ideological viewpoint as an objective fact.
If you characterize abortion rights as an “indispensable prerogative” with coercive force, then you risk implying that legal protections for abortion are an extreme imposition rather than a matter of legal precedent.