Babies Are Just Like Rapists

  • Thread starter Thread starter SwizzleStick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SwizzleStick

Guest
Ghastly is the perfect word to describe this piece. How awful! :(:mad::eek:

"Babies Are Just Like Rapists
Cornell Law Professor Sherry Colb writing for FindLaw Magazine writes a ghastly piece on abortion.

She’s writing about the case where a woman attempted to procure a late term abortion but the abortionist wasn’t on time and the baby was born alive gasping for breath, only to be thrown into a plastic bag and killed.

Now, Colb doesn’t exactly excuse the abortionist’s actions but examines them and seeks to codify them. But the language used is, I’m sure, unintentionally ghastly and cold. Reading her column sent chills up my spine.

Here’s Colb’s writing on the issue:

One might argue, as some pro-life advocates have, that there is no meaningful difference between what Gonzalez did and what an abortion provider does, because in both cases, a fetus is killed. This argument, however, ignores one of the main premises of the right to abortion – the bodily-integrity interest of the pregnant woman. Particularly at the later stages of pregnancy, the right to abortion does not protect an interest in killing a fetus as such. What it protects instead is the woman’s interest in not being physically, internally occupied by another creature against her will, the same interest that explains the right to use deadly force, if necessary, to stop a rapist. Though the fetus is innocent of any intentional wrongdoing and the rapist is not, the woman’s interest in repelling an unwanted physical intrusion is quite similar.

Yeah. That’s right. In her little metaphor the baby is a rapist."…

Full article here: creativeminorityreport.com/2009/04/babies-are-just-like-rapists.html
 
SwizzleStick said:
Ghastly is the perfect word to describe this piece. How awful! :(:mad::eek:

"Babies Are Just Like Rapists
Cornell Law Professor Sherry Colb writing for FindLaw Magazine writes a ghastly piece on abortion.

She’s writing about the case where a woman attempted to procure a late term abortion but the abortionist wasn’t on time and the baby was born alive gasping for breath, only to be thrown into a plastic bag and killed.

Now, Colb doesn’t exactly excuse the abortionist’s actions but examines them and seeks to codify them. But the language used is, I’m sure, unintentionally ghastly and cold. Reading her column sent chills up my spine.

Here’s Colb’s writing on the issue:

One might argue, as some pro-life advocates have, that there is no meaningful difference between what Gonzalez did and what an abortion provider does, because in both cases, a fetus is killed. This argument, however, ignores one of the main premises of the right to abortion – the bodily-integrity interest of the pregnant woman. Particularly at the later stages of pregnancy, the right to abortion does not protect an interest in killing a fetus as such. What it protects instead is the woman’s interest in not being physically, internally occupied by another creature against her will, the same interest that explains the right to use deadly force, if necessary, to stop a rapist. Though the fetus is innocent of any intentional wrongdoing and the rapist is not, the woman’s interest in repelling an unwanted physical intrusion is quite similar.

Yeah. That’s right. In her little metaphor the baby is a rapist."…

Full article here: creativeminorityreport.com/2009/04/babies-are-just-like-rapists.html
Click to expand...
I don’t even know how to respond.😦
 
This is just plane sickening. :banghead::banghead::banghead:
 
It is just sickening. It just leaves me shaking my head in disgust. It is so disheartening to think that there are people in the world–and a lot of them–who think like that. Is is so cold, so heartless, so evil. And, yet, if they would hear that word applied to their thought processes, conclusions and decisions–evil–I’m sure they would be shocked.

We, as a society, seem to truly be lost. God help us.
 
You know the law is wrong on an issue when it needs to reject morality in order to justify legality. The logic presented here is an incredible contrivance.
SwizzleStick said:
She’s writing about the case where a woman attempted to procure a late term abortion but the abortionist wasn’t on time and the baby was born alive gasping for breath, only to be thrown into a plastic bag and killed.
Click to expand...
This is a test case where abortion law loses internal cohesion. The murder of a one-minute-old baby is justified because 1) the mother desired it and 2) the doctor was licensed by the state of Florida to do so. If a mother asked her OB to do this to a newborn in the hospital and the doctor did so, the mother would be put in psychiatric care and the doctor disbarred and tried for murder.

There is nothing biologically different between a 23-week-old fetus and a premature 23-week-old fetus delivered, except for the biological process of labor (induced or natural). The biological process of labor is good for the baby - it prepares it for life in the outside world. The entire difference here is the intent of the mother, and of the doctor as agent of the mother’s will.

That’s the deepest fallacy with abortion law. In order to observe the right to privacy, the Court has declared that one citizen has the right to murder another citizen and contract a licensed murderer to do so. We can observe the right to privacy (something I very much believe in) without murdering children - in other words, a child does not have to die so that I can be free from warrantless searches of my home.
SwizzleStick said:
Yeah. That’s right. In her little metaphor the baby is a rapist."…
Click to expand...
We fear the loss of the Heaven and the pain of Hell. She doesn’t.
 
I don’t know what to say either. I had to force myself to read the whole thing. Then that article about the episcoplalian whatever she is. Abortion is a blessing?

I really think they are insane.
 
the person who wrote this actually is smart enough to learn to write?

If this person ever has children, this should be submitted to a judge so that the children can be removed from the home for their own safety.
 
SwizzleStick said:
Ghastly is the perfect word to describe this piece. How awful! :(:mad::eek:

"Babies Are Just Like Rapists
Cornell Law Professor Sherry Colb writing for FindLaw Magazine writes a ghastly piece on abortion.

She’s writing about the case where a woman attempted to procure a late term abortion but the abortionist wasn’t on time and the baby was born alive gasping for breath, only to be thrown into a plastic bag and killed.

Now, Colb doesn’t exactly excuse the abortionist’s actions but examines them and seeks to codify them. But the language used is, I’m sure, unintentionally ghastly and cold. Reading her column sent chills up my spine.

Here’s Colb’s writing on the issue:

One might argue, as some pro-life advocates have, that there is no meaningful difference between what Gonzalez did and what an abortion provider does, because in both cases, a fetus is killed. This argument, however, ignores one of the main premises of the right to abortion – the bodily-integrity interest of the pregnant woman. Particularly at the later stages of pregnancy, the right to abortion does not protect an interest in killing a fetus as such. What it protects instead is the woman’s interest in not being physically, internally occupied by another creature against her will, the same interest that explains the right to use deadly force, if necessary, to stop a rapist. Though the fetus is innocent of any intentional wrongdoing and the rapist is not, the woman’s interest in repelling an unwanted physical intrusion is quite similar.

Yeah. That’s right. In her little metaphor the baby is a rapist."…

Full article here: creativeminorityreport.com/2009/04/babies-are-just-like-rapists.html
Click to expand...
I hate to respond logically to someone who has no moral compass, but the author ignores a little inconvenient fact - assuming the pregnancy was not a consequence of rape, that baby came into being because of the actions of the mother (and father). She is “occupied by another creature” because of her will…not against her will.

BTW…I thought a fetus becomes a baby upon birth. Isn’t a preemie still considered a baby? If I am correct, then her statement that “in both cases a fetus was killed” is not accurate.

So, what we have is an illogical, ignorant person without a moral compass. How the heck did she get a law degree? :confused:
 
KathleenElsie said:
This is just plane sickening. :banghead::banghead::banghead:
Click to expand...
:rotfl:

Oh, indeed it is sickening! But why get mad? What a waste of energy!

Hah! And now I remember! When Our Lord did say, “Cry not for me, but for yourselves and your children!” Aha! Aha ha hah ha hah! It fits! It works! It’s relevant! Ooooh, isn’t it just great when everything fits together? Like a bug in a rug? Or a baby in his mother’s–Oh, wait, no. Not that one.
I wonder if the writer has every been raped? Or talked to those who have been? Or pregnant? Or talked to those who have been? Or both? Or talked to those who have been both?

And I hope, now that babies are rapists, they can be punished accordingly, and the little fiends torn from their mothers arms and put in prison where they belong. Criminals at such an early age. Sickening. :dts:
 
i am speechless. “an unwanted physical intrusion”???

how can you compare a baby growing inside you to the violent act of a rapist?!:confused:

sometimes i am almost afraid to come to the forum because i am afraid of what i will read on here next that will convince me that there is no hope for this world anymore.

between the new dean of an episcopal school of divinity saying that abortionists are a blessing and doing holy work to this - it can’t get any worse. these two are at the bottom of the barrel in my opinion.
 
A glimpse into the workings of my mind.
…
…
…

ERROR: Logic routines crashed…

Rebooting system…

…
…
…

Critical Error: Logic routines disabled by intense stupidity…

System shutting down…

Brain Off-Line…
 
This is not news.
This is exactly as the pro-choice side of the debate has always maintained.
This is what is referred to as being punished with a baby.

This is the kind of achievement that priest of Notre Dame deemed worthy of special honor.

It is a fate worse than rape, according to the pro-choice.

The law and order constituency of the left can use this argument to justify our societies choice of capital punishment for ‘baby rapists’ of this sort.
 
Ok???

Lets look at her from her perspective.

The baby is “like” a rapist.

ok.

Then why give the baby the death penalty?

A rapist gets jail time not the death penalty.

So by aborting you are then a vigilante, which is a crime and are subject to jail time for taking the laws into your own hands.

So treat the “fetus” like the rapist and hand them over to the law for due process.
Did I miss anything?:cool:
 
fellowChristian said:
Ok???

Lets look at her from her perspective.

The baby is “like” a rapist.

ok.

Then why give the baby the death penalty?

A rapist gets jail time not the death penalty.

So by aborting you are then a vigilante, which is a crime and are subject to jail time for taking the laws into your own hands.

So treat the “fetus” like the rapist and hand them over to the law for due process.
Did I miss anything?:cool:
Click to expand...
I know what your intent is and it is good. But the whole concept is so disgusting that I do not know how it can be turned positive.
 
SwizzleStick said:
Ghastly is the perfect word to describe this piece. How awful! :(:mad::eek:

"Babies Are Just Like Rapists
Cornell Law Professor Sherry Colb writing for FindLaw Magazine writes a ghastly piece on abortion.

She’s writing about the case where a woman attempted to procure a late term abortion but the abortionist wasn’t on time and the baby was born alive gasping for breath, only to be thrown into a plastic bag and killed.

Now, Colb doesn’t exactly excuse the abortionist’s actions but examines them and seeks to codify them. But the language used is, I’m sure, unintentionally ghastly and cold. Reading her column sent chills up my spine.

Here’s Colb’s writing on the issue:

One might argue, as some pro-life advocates have, that there is no meaningful difference between what Gonzalez did and what an abortion provider does, because in both cases, a fetus is killed. This argument, however, ignores one of the main premises of the right to abortion – the bodily-integrity interest of the pregnant woman. Particularly at the later stages of pregnancy, the right to abortion does not protect an interest in killing a fetus as such. What it protects instead is the woman’s interest in not being physically, internally occupied by another creature against her will, the same interest that explains the right to use deadly force, if necessary, to stop a rapist. Though the fetus is innocent of any intentional wrongdoing and the rapist is not, the woman’s interest in repelling an unwanted physical intrusion is quite similar.

Yeah. That’s right. In her little metaphor the baby is a rapist."…

Full article here: creativeminorityreport.com/2009/04/babies-are-just-like-rapists.html
Click to expand...
since the woman consented to saving sex then obviously she knew the consequences of her immodest actions and knew she might get pregnant.

I’ve seen alot of horrid arguments to reduce the culpability of abortion, but this one is by far the worst. This is the face of abortion and radical feminism.
 
As sickening as the reasoning is behind this person’s argument, I would seriously hope her argument is widely read among the public. Most people, I believe, recognize how repugnant and ridiculous it is to compare an unborn child to a rapist and would naturally dismiss her argument as the ravings of someone who has lost their moral compass and is seeking to replace it with insipid intellectualism. Arguments such as this only serve to advance the pro life movement by revealing the lack of realistic thinking or genuine concern for women that is present in the pro abortion movement.
 
By her logic I suppose it would be OK to shoot the head of the draft board for “forcing her to do something with her body that she didn’t want to.”

Or maybe even an executive or lawmaker who tried to make “voluntary service” mandatory.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top