The criminal activity as defined in this case would be kidnapping and assault, (or in a civil context she could sue him for false imprisonment and assault).
So you think my position gets tarnished by crazies like Shannon and Roeder take non-life affirming actions, but can’t see that the pro-“choice” position is weakened by crazies like this man who tried to take the woman’s “choice” away. I personally don’t think my pro-life position is harmed by the crazies because I think what they did was completely wrong. I would assume pro-“choicers” would be equally upset with this man, because if they see what he did (or tried to do) as morally reprehensible then it does not weaken their position as much.
(otherwise their position would be contradictory, how can abortion be a woman’s choice if a man can force her to have an abortion?)
And yes the very fact that people do not see what he did as awful, is scary, because it either means that they actually are pro-abortion despite saying that they are only “pro-choice,” or that they are ambivalent to violence and injustice in our world.
The fact that abortion is allowed because it is an issue of woman’s individual privacy and therefore a woman’s choice, then we as a society need to discuss, when a woman no longer has the choice, whether or not allowing abortion is fulfilling the purpose for which it was legalized.
We only have the news article in this case, I suppose in 6 months I could look up the case and see if he pleaded guilty or was found guilty or not in the court of law, but like I said it will take some time for this to move through the courts I am sure. So we assume what was reported was accurate, we do this with all articles not just with Life site news, because we cannot know otherwise and the outcome will probably not be reported.
