She kills two of the kids outright, then has the evil in her to worry she might have a miscarriage later in the pregnancy? Why? They're NOT HUMAN BEINGS, ARE THEY????She kills two of the kids outright, then has the evil in her to worry she might have a miscarriage later in the pregnancy? Why? They're NOT HUMAN BEINGS, ARE THEY????It is evil and unsettling. They're not human - TO HER. She's worried about a miscarriage if she decides she wants them. They have value worth saving when and only if she decides they have some value to her, only if she invests any emotional or financial interest in them. Otherwise, just worthless. By the same token, the nuisance and danger of a miscarriage is the danger to her (a reasonable enough fear, but it doesn't seem she fears the same for the baby as she does for herself) and the effect it will have on her and her precious work.
A little part of me wonders if this 'heartwrenching' article isn't 'commissioned' if you will in response to the overwhelming response given to the new 3-d imaging of babies in the womb and how these ultrasounds and other studies point out just how human babies are and how alert, averse to pain, intelligent, unique, etc., each baby is. And how people who supported unlimited abortion and related issues are beginning to see it's not so cut and dried. I mean, the whole planned parenthood lie is based on the baby being just a blob of cells. Millions of us heard this all thru grade school and high school in the 70's and 80's. Now it just might not be true?? Or at least more complex than previously believed? Shhhh, don't let the cat out of the bag! They must be a little worried, at least from a revenue point of view.