Wow. I clicked the article and read it. Isn't it just ludicris that an abortion can be performed to kill the baby, but then if it is born alive, then left to die, people are suddenly uneasy about it? Kill it while it is inside the mother and there's no problem, but kill it outside the womb and it becomes murder. What kind of thought process do these people have? Talk about denial of what is really going on. It is shameful. I am not a hateful person towards those who are pro-abortion or towards those who have had abortions. I know many women are in very difficult circumstances, so I am not uncaring about them. BUT, abortion needs to be honestly faced and not treated as if it is like having a wart removed.

BTW, I rented Vera Drake a couple of weeks ago. It was a good flick, just like you said. It made the viewer think.
 

Nicely done. I'm really impressed at how your blanket declarations about other people's rights, with no supporting argument, get even more compelling when you use really big fonts, boldface, and underlining. You'll be a movement leader soon.

As for why abortion is "about women's bodies", it's simple enough: the fetuses you're so focused on come out of the bodies of women who choose not to let them stay there.

What happens to the fetus after it's out of the woman's body - the issue addressed in the article you link - is also of some concern, but has no bearing on whether she is required to let it live inside her body against her will.

It's not that hard to comprehend. If you woke up one day with a human body growing inside your abdomen, I think you'd suddenly discover that "your body" was a relevant matter.
 

Very interesting article...

I always tell people that, as I'm a male who will probably remain single the rest of his life, I'll never have to decide about the abortion thing one way or the other.

But that article will give me a lot to think about for a while.
 

Kevin T. Keith: you use really big fonts, boldface, and underlining. You'll be a movement leader soon.

Alright, you've started your critique with an attack on the font. Not on the argument I made, but the font. And the sad thing is, you've front-loaded your comment with your strongest point.

has no bearing on whether she is required to let it live inside her body against her will.

What was that? Required to let it do what??? Live, you said? As in, alive? As in a living person? Oh, well, if you put it that way, that makes PERFECT sense. Of course she should have the right to commit murder for her convenience. She was willing to risk conception by having sex, but it's just far too much to expect her to live with the consequences of her choice. Kevin T. Keith, you've won me over to your side. Let the infanticide continue in the name of a lady's prerogative to change her mind! The baby she'd end up having, after all, might not match her home decor. Nobody shoud have to put up with that. Three cheers for the persuasive powers of Kevin T. Keith!

If you woke up one day with a human body growing inside your abdomen, I think you'd suddenly discover that "your body" was a relevant matter.

Well, again... at least you admit that it's a human body. After that, your point (and I use the term "point" humorously) becomes goofy beyond belief.

Yeah, being a male, I'd be pretty freaked out if I had a human growing inside of me.

However, if I woke up to find out that a woman I'd had sex with had a human growing inside of her... or, if I were a woman, and I woke up to find that, after having sex, I had a human being growing inside of me, murdering that person wouldn't be an option I'd consider. That's just me, though. I'm not into killing people in order to keep my life nice, clean and neat.

Cheers, Kevin T. Keith. Once again, you've reminded me that the pro-abortion argument is transparent, self-centered, irrational, and just flat out stupid. Enjoy your delusions.
 

how come you got more comments for the same piece? I think I need to hire a blog PR firm...
 

Jerry: how come you got more comments for the same piece?

Gotta be the big font.
 

Kevin T. - Could you answer one question for me? How is it that in California if you murder a pregnant woman you can be charged with double murder (as in the Scott Peterson trial), yet that same woman could legally go and have an abortion? Does the woman's desire to "want" the baby make it a separate human? And vice-versa, the lack of desire to "want" the "fetus" makes it non-human? Wow, I didn't know the human mind was capable of such feats.
 

Game, Set and Match - Jamie

Abortion-on-demand activists can try to justify until the cows come home, but they can't have their cake and eat it too.