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.