Babies Are Just Like Rapists
Cornell Law Professor Sherry Colb writing for FindLaw Magazine writes a ghastly piece on abortion.
She's writing about the case where a woman attempted to procure a late term abortion but the abortionist wasn't on time and the baby was born alive gasping for breath, only to be thrown into a plastic bag and killed.
Now, Colb doesn't exactly excuse the abortionist's actions but examines them and seeks to codify them. But the language used is, I'm sure, unintentionally ghastly and cold. Reading her column sent chills up my spine.
Here's Colb's writing on the issue:
One might argue, as some pro-life advocates have, that there is no meaningful difference between what Gonzalez did and what an abortion provider does, because in both cases, a fetus is killed. This argument, however, ignores one of the main premises of the right to abortion – the bodily-integrity interest of the pregnant woman. Particularly at the later stages of pregnancy, the right to abortion does not protect an interest in killing a fetus as such. What it protects instead is the woman's interest in not being physically, internally occupied by another creature against her will, the same interest that explains the right to use deadly force, if necessary, to stop a rapist. Though the fetus is innocent of any intentional wrongdoing and the rapist is not, the woman's interest in repelling an unwanted physical intrusion is quite similar.
Yeah. That's right. In her little metaphor the baby is a rapist.
But of course that doesn't make sense because the woman likely became pregnant through an act of her own will whereas a rape takes place against a woman's will.
Now, to be fair, Colb argues that the treatment of the "creature" as she calls the baby should be investigated as homicide (which it isn't for some crazy reason.)
In fact, Colb encourages that even non-viable fetuses who are born accidentally should be treated well. Get this one:
When a nonviable fetus completely emerges from the womb alive, writhing, and gasping for breath, the right thing to do is – at the very least – to comfort the creature until it expires or to contact someone else who will.
That's right. Contact someone who will. From the abortion clinic you should call a friend and say "Hey buddy, I just tried killing my baby but the creature was born anyway. I'm pretty sure it'll expire soon so could you come on down here and hug the thing until it dies. Cool?"
But why is she even so concerned with being merciful to the baby that she's allowing to be killed? It makes no sense to me. Because the baby emerged from a woman's womb it's not OK to kill it then but moments before it's fair game.
In the end, Colb blames guess who for late term abortions. Come on make a guess. That's right pro-lifers. I'm not kidding. Because pro-lifers are asking for things like parental consent they make it more difficult to procure early abortions so pro-lifers make late term abortions more likely.
Well, just file this one under the ever expanding file of Ivy League Lunacy. And these are the elites of our culture. No wonder we're in such trouble.