Abortion Activist Compares Pregnancy to Rape to Justify Abortion

Life News ^ | 8/11/14 | Steven Ertelt

[wagglebee]

Pro-life activist Sarah Terzo runs a web site that exposes some of the craziest and most bizarre quotes from abortion practitioners and abortion advocates. She recently posted one quote that is eyebrow-raising.

Prochoicer Eileen McDonagh:

“Some might suggest that the solution to coercive pregnancy is simply for the woman to wait until the fetus is born, at which point its coercive imposition of pregnancy will cease. This type of reasoning is akin to suggesting that a woman being raped should wait until the rape is over rather than stopping the rapist…. the fetus is not innocent but instead aggressively intrudes on a woman’s body so massively that deadly force is justified to stop it.”

She acknowledges:

“Few people are going to be comfortable with the idea.”

Eileen L. McDonagh, Breaking the Abortion Deadlock: From Choice to Consent (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), pp. 7, 11–12, 192.

The quote comes from 1996. So surely abortion advocates, almost 20 years later, are wiser and more understanding of the difference between rape and abortion?

Apparently not. Consider this follow up comment from an anonymous abortion activist who defends McDonagh.

Sorry to disappoint you, but McDonagh is correct.

She is right to point out that consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. If the zygote were to be accorded the status of a person, this would be particularly true, because the woman’s consent to sex would be consent to the particular man’s body part, not consent to this completely different person.

She is right from a scientific perspective. The AMA and its British equivalent acknowledge that pregnancy begins at implantation, not fertilization. And all the evidence points to the blastocyst invading the woman’s bodily tissue, not the woman’s body making the blastocyst enter her tissue.

In fact, research on other placental mammals shows that the female’s immune attack T-cells would cause spontaneous abortion of all pregnancies save those where the embryo is a product of identical twin in-breeding if the embryo did not cause the placenta it makes to starve those T-cells into latency.

A microorganism, too, might not look very forceful, yet some can kill.

So the anti-abortion people need to wake up and face reality.

Face reality? This abortion proponent might want to check her closest mirror.

[wagglebee]

"the fetus is not innocent but instead aggressively intrudes on a woman’s body so massively that deadly force is justified to stop it."

Pure evil.

[wagglebee]

Pro-Life Ping

[wagglebee]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[Don Corleone]

Jumping through hoops to justify murder.

[a fool in paradise]

the fetus is not innocent but instead aggressively intrudes on a woman’s body so massively that deadly force is justified to stop it.”

Someone is waging a war on science.

The baby daddy is on the hook for 18 years of financial support. Mama only has to surrender 9 months.

Who REALLY is being oppressed in something that was a consensual act?

The baby.

[cloudmountain]

the fetus is not innocent but instead aggressively intrudes on a woman’s body so massively that deadly force is justified to stop it."
Pure evil.

YES.
Prochoicer Eileen McDonagh--"prochoicer"--she has the choice to murder HER OWN flesh and blood. Well, when her life ends, so will her "choices."

[RedMDer]

All contributions are for the current
quarter expenses.



Keep Free Republic Alive with YOUR Donations!
Make a difference.
PLEASE Contribute Today!

[cloudmountain]

Someone is waging a war on science.
The baby daddy is on the hook for 18 years of financial support. Mama only has to surrender 9 months.
Who REALLY is being oppressed in something that was a consensual act?
The baby.

CORRECT: the baby.

Statistics show that fatherless babies (by design) eventually and overwhelmingly turn into convicts.

Mommy-dearest, contrary to the old "Murphy Brown" thinking, CANNOT rear children by herself. Daddy-dearest IS essential.

Dan Quayle was RIGHT.

[oldbrowser]

She is right to point out that consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.

So when I consent to eating ice cream and cake, I am not consenting to sugar, fat, and calories or to gaining the weight. Just the ice cream and cake?

[Sherman Logan]

The baby daddy is on the hook for 18 years of financial support. Mama only has to surrender 9 months.

NOT a good pro-life argument.

Mama is also on the hook for that 18 years. And a vastly greater number of them fulfill that obligation as compared to baby daddies.

[envisio]

One day these people... whether they choose to believe it or not... one day, they will have to stand before God.

[Sherman Logan]

Statistics show that fatherless babies (by design) eventually and overwhelmingly turn into convicts.

I think you're quite incorrect. A significantly larger percentage of fatherless children get into criminal behavior.

That's very different from saying a majority of them do, much less an overwhelming majority.

[onedoug]

Isaiah 5:20

[cloudmountain]

I think you're quite incorrect. A significantly larger percentage of fatherless children get into criminal behavior. That's very different from saying a majority of them do, much less an overwhelming majority.

You MUST be an attorney.

[Sherman Logan]

Nope. Nor do I play one on TV.

I did, however, stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

I don’t think it’s nitpicking to point out the difference between “more” fatherless children getting into legal trouble and “most” doing so.

Although it’s not easy to find the actual statistics, and if I’m wrong I’ll be glad to admit it.

I also think the very idea that fatherlessness, as such, causes these problems is kind of stupid. A very large percentage, quite probably most, of the baby daddies who impregnate and abandon the mothers of their kids are irresponsible (more or less by definition), thugs, or both.

Having a guy like this around for 18 years while the child is being raised does not seem to me to necessarily be a huge improvement over his being absent. Nor does it seem likely that having him around would reduce criminality.

What would accomplish that is a stable, responsible father. But men of that description aren’t fathering and abandoning kids.

[angryoldfatman]

So when I consent to eating ice cream and cake, I am not consenting to sugar, fat, and calories or to gaining the weight. Just the ice cream and cake?

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Excellent analogy!

The “pro-choicers” mentioned are truly anti-science and anti-reailty, in that they deny the reality and inevitability of biology.

You eat chocolate ice cream to excess, you get “raped” by fat and obesity.

You have sex carelessly, often, and with abandon, you get “raped” by zygotes/fetuses/whatever-euphemism-to-deny-unborn-children-their-humanity.

[Jack Hydrazine]

‘the fetus is not innocent but instead aggressively intrudes on a woman’s body so massively that deadly force is justified to stop it.”
Pure evil.

YES.
Prochoicer Eileen McDonagh—”prochoicer”—she has the choice to murder HER OWN flesh and blood. Well, when her life ends, so will her “choices.” ‘

And you could take this one step further ala Dr. Peter Singer and post-birth abortions. She obviously isn’t a sentient human being by promoting evil against the most innocent of life. And she’s aggressively intruding on my pro-life stance so deadly force is justified to stop her.

[Politicalkiddo]

“the fetus is not innocent but instead aggressively intrudes on a woman’s body so massively that deadly force is justified to stop it.”

......

....

..........Stupidest Statement in History Award.

[Politicalkiddo]

As my high school health teacher said, “You have reproductive organs in order to REPRODUCE”.

[Salvation]

Can you tell the difference?