The American Spectator

Roy| 3.20.09 @ 5:43PM

I really love that argument. It's as if when we were in the depths of the slaveowning period, when anybody with one drop of "negro" blood was automatically a slave, anti-slavers were concentrating on that fact since it represented the easiest change.

Then somebody discovered a terrible hypocrisy. They had not condemned conscription loudly enough, though that could be called involuntary servitude.

The current regime is that any unborn human can be slaughtered at any time, for any reason, by any method no matter how brutal. In fact, with the ascent of The One, you can hardly even say "unborn human" - you're forced to say "very small human that no more powerful human cares about".

Somebody who wondered whether one-celled human beings were human but was clear that human beings in the fifth month of development are, should recoil from the current regime as violently as the Pope, if they really mean that.

Of course I'm against the industrial scale production and destruction of tiny human beings, but in a world where we can't even establish, as an uncontroversial proposition that only a monster would disagree with, that a fully born alive human has all the rights of any other human, even if they are "unwanted", I'll pick my battles. And we can't establish that. A certain B.H. Obama voted against it and was overwhelmingly elected to the White House.

Thomas| 3.20.09 @ 7:40PM

This has been argued to death and the IVF mantra is largely a red herring to distract from the basic belief held by certain liberals; that of THEIR right to kill anything and everything they want for any reason at all. Of course, if someone advocated killing THEM it would be a different matter. Hypocrisy on the march.