The Exigent Duality
Smoke Screen Clears - 11:49 CST, 2/07/19 (Sniper)
I've always had the strong suspicion that the moral philosophizing-- if you can call it that, since the arguments were usually very poor-- in support of "abortion" was merely a front for women simply wanting the removal of consequences for their actions. I've held these suspicions, because very nearly every person I've encountered who supports "abortion" uses moral relativism for every other aspect of their belief system: why should they suddenly become absolutists for this one, single issue?

Lo and behold, my suspicions were correct. Listen to a Democrat suddenly try to use the moral absolutist "it's the woman's body" argument regarding a baby who isn't in the woman's body anymore! It's clear now that this argument was just a smoke screen, as I'd always thought, because here it's still being employed when it obviously doesn't apply.

The other telling thing is that it's painfully clear that the changes in this bill-- only one doctor needed before the baby can be put down like a dog at the vet, that the woman can initiate the murder by claiming "mental" difficulty, and so forth-- are designed for no other reason than to make it easier for a woman to not have to raise the child she spread her legs to have. Because if the woman really is about to die, you don't think the hospital would be able to get three doctor approvals lickety-split?