You’re a Monster!
Did you know that you’re a rapist? Well, you are. This Cornell law professor, said so.
What, are you going to argue? She’s a professor. She has college degrees. She’s probably even written a book. And not one of those books with lots of pictures, either, you unrepentant sexual predator.
And how dare you rape her lungs by exhaling all that carbon dioxide and nitrogen! What kind of animal are you?
Don’t even look at me. You’re disgusting.
Okay, now that I’ve gotten that out of my system, I have a serious question. Did Professor Feminist Knucklehead just admit that a fetus is a person? If her point is that the intrusion creates a specific legal right to repel that intrusion with lethal force, then the “creature” doing the intruding must be another legal person, otherwise there’s no issue. If you’re attacked by an alien body snatcher, who attempts to “physically, internally” occupy you, and you burn it with a flamethrower, you don’t have to explain the alien flambé. Likewise, if a bear attacks you, you can shoot the heck out of it and take its carcass home as a rug if you want.
The only way you’d need to justify lethal force is if another person is involved, which completely gutshoots the main leg of the pro-abortion argument — that a fetus is not a person but property to be disposed of as its owner, the woman carrying it, wishes. The pro-abortion argument starts to get incredibly ugly to the average American when that human being is thought of as a person and not property. I don’t think that Professor Colb really wants to go down that road, does she?
UPDATE: Linked back by Stacy McCain.
UPDATE: Linked by Duane Lester. Thanks!
Other Posts of Interest:
Category: Progressives, The Social Issues
OMFG. What pisses me off most is people that argue about abortion being their right, are alive to be stupid cunts. If their parents had felt that way about birth etc, then their sorry, ignorant asses wouldn't be around would they?
Ahem. I am not simply a Monster. I am The Monster.
As I've said elsewhere in response to the referenced article, my position on abortion is that a woman does have the right to evict an embryo/fetus from her womb, just as she has the right to evict an unwanted boarder from her home. However, deadly force is not justified in an eviction, absent specific circumstances over and above the "unwanted occupation" itself.
Which is why I say that any abortion that takes place after the fetus has any measurable chance of surviving ex utero, the abortion should take the form of induced premature delivery, and reasonable efforts should be made to give the baby that chance at survival. This is precisely what the article's author rejects, as the woman might have to endure pain, and a non-zero chance of death, in the process.
If my mother were alive today, she could tell you about pain. She bore eight children, routinely going a month past the due date, and was in labor for three days evicting my 13 lb., 1.5 oz. baby body out of her. Now that is an occupation.
Like I said… I'm The Monster.