Clump off the Old Block

[rlg94086]

From www.opinionjournal.com Best of the Web (12/21)

Clump off the Old Block

Here is a bizarre correction from today’s New York Times (fourth item):Because of an editing error, an article on Saturday about a hearing in the Duke University rape case incorrectly described a judge’s ruling. The judge ordered a paternity test on the baby expected to be born soon to the accuser in the case, not on the fetus.
That is one doozy of an editing error! It has been scientifically proven that a fetus is just a clump of cells, so how in the world could you perform a “paternity test” on one? It makes no sense. Would you perform a paternity test on a tumor or a fingernail?

(btw…that’s sarcasm on the editor’s part.)

 

[gam197]

Interesting, now we can do blood tests to determine paternity and that’s OK.

This is like the surgery that they do to correct abnormalities. Who knows what they call that. I thought they call all pre-born human life, a fetus, never baby.

Otherwise you couldn’t do late term abortions and partial birth abortions.

 

[rlg94086]

Interesting, now we can do blood tests to determine paternity and that’s OK.

This is like the surgery that they do to correct abnormalities. Who knows what they call that. I thought they call all pre-born human life, a fetus, never baby.

Otherwise you couldn’t do late term abortions and partial birth abortions.

Yep. The best-of-the-web editors are very good at pointing out this hypocrisy when it shows up. Some articles regarding the death of a mother and unborn child even mix the terms baby and fetus…they can’t decide apparently.

I can remember years back a TV doctor on my local news said that smoking while pregnant is equivalent to child abuse. This same doctor is pro choice. If smoking while pregnant is child abuse, wouldn’t it logically follow that abortion is murder? Apparenlty not.

I think the rule is - if he/she is wanted, it’s a baby; if not, it’s a fetus.