- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
"But, I'll give you the point that the child might have died later. So, if I murder my lawyer friend next door I'll say to the judge that he might have died someday anyway! Think that would work?" -- heru-ur
No, I don't think so.
I DO think...
...it's interesting that you decline to answer the question about saving a kid vs. a tray of blastocysts from a burning building.
...it's confusing that I've read all your arguments, and it's still not quite clear to me whether you're just making an impassioned personal argument about your beliefs, or whether you're suggesting that our nation's laws governing a specific right of women should be changed on the basis of your arguments.
...it's troubling that in several of your more passionate posts, I was left with a very strong impression of misogyny and anger at women for being pregnant. (This is just a personal impression. I'm perfectly prepared to concede that I may be a judgmental asshole on this issue.)
My view is that some people arguing with you are making a distinction that you do not make. They distinguish between the destruction of a zygote/embryo/fetus inside a woman's uterus and the destruction of a child post-birth.
Your unwillingness to address that distinction directly puzzles me a bit.
