Pro-choicers rip each other apart in nasty dispute

Pro-choicers are starting a feud among themselves.

Ann Furedi, chief executive of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), the largest abortion provider in the United Kingdom, has “excommunicated” U.S. abortion philosopher Frances Kissling from the abortion movement, calling her a “former pro-choice advocate” because she is not defending a woman’s “right to choose” abortion from conception all the way to birth. (Source)

What is Kissling’s horrible crime, you ask? She wrote the following in a Washington Post column:

“We must end the fiction that an abortion at 26 weeks is no different from one at six weeks… We need to firmly and clearly reject post-viability abortions except in the most extreme cases.”

Sounds reasonable to me. But Furedi is a hardliner. Here’s what she thinks:

“Personally, I believe early and late abortions carry the same moral burden because I believe that all abortions end a potential human life. And further to that, I believe that the moral responsibility of decision-making, whatever the gestation, should rest with women and their doctors, because they most understand their circumstances and the results of their actions,” she said. “Others, Kissling and Saletan among them, seem to believe that early abortion is okay but late abortion is not because the early embryo is less of a human.”

Even though Kissling is the more moderate of the two, I think Furedi is more honest with herself when she says that “early and late abortions carry the same moral burden.” That’s what pro-lifers have been saying. Her mistake is to consider both early and late abortions to be acceptable because they only kill a “potential human life” rather than an actual one.

The feud doesn’t surprise me. As I’ve said before, people who are profoundly pro-choice are not to be trusted:

You see, anybody who consciously supports the killing of unborn babies and sick people to avoid inconvenience is not likely to be your strongest ally when things start going south for you. Their mentality is infected with a distorted individualism and utilitarianism that would go so far as to take an innocent life — even their own flesh and blood — to spare themselves sacrifice.  Don’t tell me that this mentality doesn’t manifest itself in other aspects of their lives.  So should we really be surprised that they turn on a friend?  Could you ever really trust them? (Source)

One thought on “Pro-choicers rip each other apart in nasty dispute

  1. Why are conservative women trying to co-opt the name of feminism? Leave it to the pro-baby killers. Why do we want this label so bad? It’s been tainted by women who think killing a 36-week-old fetus is of no account.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Solve : *
8 × 28 =