An Oakland woman has been arrested for having three late-term abortions on a San Francisco pier. The victims were past the 7th, 15th, and 27th trimesters. In the United States, women generally have the freedom to choose before the 4th trimester, but after that point they face prosecution as there has been no Roe v. Wade-type case finding a right to a post-birth abortion in the Constitution yet. Have patience, the future is just around the corner. How far off is the day, really, when feminists speak derisively of the bad old days of coathanger abortions in back-alleys nighttime post-birth abortions on dimly-lit docks? No word yet if the National Organization for Women will publicly defend this murderer as they publicly defended the Texas mother who drowned five of her children.

Dan
Is this the best you can do for your Pro Life point of view? Is this your best arguement?
Ann Coulter is laughing at this one.

And what is the rationale for legalization of infanticide (in utero). I'm sorry, I must have missed it. Did you have a rebuttal or are you content to hurl insults?

RC, I have to agree with Homer and Dan; these were helpless children, totally dependent upon their mother for their survival, and she obviously decided they were a burden she was no longer willing to bear. Besides, wasn't it her right to choose? And before you tell me she could have given them up for adoption of over to the nanny-state, how is that different from a pregnant woman. I guess the "right" to choose only lasts so long.

And by the way, who's to say what she did is wrong? What's the moral (what an ugly word) basis for such a judgement? Oh, that pesky Judeo-Christian admonition against murder contained in the Ten Commandments. Oh, it's against the law you say; well, so were sodomy, aldutery, assisted suicide, euthenasia and any number of other "sins" that have since become "acceptable". Once the "right" to "privacy" becomes your religion, and you abandon any basis for moral judgment, where does it end?

Do you mean the 7th, 15th and 27th WEEKS? There are only three trimesters.

Bob - The children were 16 mos., 2 1/2 yrs and 6 yrs old. Do the math. I have always used Roe v Wade to keep my kids in line - "I have a constitutionally protected right to abort you, so you better clean your room!"

I have already heard the liberals coming out with the "poor woman was on medication which she must not have been taking" defense prep.

String her up!

Dan,
you are just a cruel heartless man. Do you even begin to understand what a mother has to go through? These kids could have ruined her life. She might not have been able to go to college if you forced her to raise these unwanted children. Where are you pro-lifers when it comes to raising children? No, you just want them alive so you can put them in jail when they are grown up. We have to think of the woman's life. She was here first, after all.

All I have to say...is that apparently Emmanuel Lewis has lost his mind.

Good recall, Homer. I hope you know I'm teasing the geese here.

My bad - sorry. Obviously, I was rushing through my Channel Group. That's the beauty of blogs, when you stick your foot in your mouth, it's out there forever.

Good post (now that I've taken the time to read AND think.)

You guys must be right.

They’re not fighting a war in Iraq, it’s one big Abortion. (of course that was a pro choice situation)

It isn’t the Death penalty – It is an 84th trimester abortion.

Strong arguments – I am convinced.

Now you're coming around RC.

I am not of understanding of this RC person. I understand difficultness of non speaking English. Maybe I can help with other Flynn File reader better understanding you? Because your sense is not there.

Tarbash
You are missing the subtlety of sarcasm.

I am sorry for not reading this word before. I believe you are making a argument, but I can not understand it.

You are thinking of killing a baby? This is very bad! I hope you be reported to police!

This entry is off the charts for attention-grabbing! What next, invite legal an*lyst Daniel Horowitz to comment on it? Given how entrenched many pro-choice leftists, tough, I don't grudge Flynnfiles this angle on the subject.

Some guys just have a problem with a woman's reproductive rights - after all, they enable a woman to say "no, I don't want to have sex with you" and expect the little leg-humper to back off.

Just playin' with you guys ;)

CHOICE = DEATH

DEATH IS BAD.

HMMMMMM....

SIMPLISTIC ARGUMENTS = FALSE ASSUMPTIONS
FALSE ASSUMPTIONS = DODGY POLICY
DODGY POLICY = ALTERIOR AGENDA
ALTERIOR AGENDA = ANGRY AT FEMALES SAYING "NO"???

Still just playing with you guys ;)