A member of the National Organization for Women is saying that it is wrong to charge Scott Peterson with a double homicide because one of the victims was a fetus.

To think that the pro-choice crowd accuses the pro-life crowd of being "extremists". This is a statement that can be considered nothing but extremist in nature. Such arguments poison the well for rational discourse on such an important issue as abortion. Such a comment is shameful, stupid, and worthy of contempt by both sides of the abortion debate.

4 thoughts on “Shameful…

  1. Should a pregnant woman be able to drive in the carpool lane and avoid a ticket when the cops pull her over? Should she be able to claim a fetus as a dependent on her income tax forms? Should she be able to get the family discount when she goes to the movies since she’ll be “watching the movie for two”?

    Considering your position on the Peterson “double murder” case, your answer better have been yes on all of these questions. Whatever your position on the abortion issue, you can’t claim a fetus is a human only when it conveniences you and pretend it doesn’t exist when it doesn’t. I trust that if you ever become a theater manager, you’ll let all pregnant women into every movies on the family discount.

  2. Mark, Mark, Mark…

    Do you enter into contracts with five-year-old children? To be as consistent as you’re demanding Jay be, you’d have to. Aren’t these junior-high logical games fun!

    If illogic were vodka, you’d have the mother of all hangovers.

    There’s nothing discontinuous about differentiating between “Customers”, “Passengers”, “Dependents” (all of which have legal definitions, which could reasonably be seen by *reasonable* people to include “Ex-Utero”) and Life.

    There are different stages to a human life – unless you enter into contracts with children, you’d have to allow that just as children can’t sign contracts or vote or drive, BUT are still people, then a fetus too is at a different stage of life; not subject to occupancy limits in the elevator, doesn’t need to buy a separate meal at the 2-1 deal, but still a life.

    By the way, lose the sneer quotes. It was a double murder.

  3. It’s really not that ambiguous. Either a fetus is a person or it isn’t. If murdering a pregnant woman becomes a double murder out of convenience to the state’s criminal case, letting a pregnant woman file a fetus as a dependent on her tax return needs to be allowed just the same to the inconvenience of the state. I’m not an abortion defender, but I’m also not a defender of hypocrisy, and conservatives manage to dole out more hypocrisy on the abortion issue than they do with the rest of their dubious agenda.

  4. This was not a first trimester fetus, this was a viable child that would have survived outside the womb. I think NOW has a serious credibility problem with this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.