I don't know what to say about this except:  Wow.

We all know that something magical happens when a rape or incest victim has an abortion. The crying child turns into fairydust and just vanishes away at the touch of the curette. Even—no, especially—if the rape or incest victim is a minor.

I mean, I wasn't expecting anything other than hate speech (disguised to look like Christian love, of course) out of the Dawn Patrol, so I really shouldn't have been surprised...but I must admit I was taken aback by the viciousness of her sarcasm, not to mention her utter lack of empathy for people in extremis.  As one commenter put it, "apparently her sympathy for others ends when they emerge from the vaginal canal."

And then there are the comments to that post, wherein Dawn favors us with such gems as this:

A woman who is subject to an abortion after a rape is not in control of her body. Abortions are invasive.

Emergency contraception only adds more pain to a woman’s life and erases the evidence of the rape. Abortion is a rapist’s best friend.

and this:

[A] victim of rape or incest’s tears won’t end with an abortion. The baby’s will.

Abortion is a rapist’s best friend because it destroys the evidence.

*boggle*

I assume pregnancy isn't invasive?  And women can't choose abortions, but are "subject to" them?  And carrying her rapist's child -- for forensic purposes, even! -- doesn't "add more pain to a woman's life"?

Incidentally, Dawn mentioned that the only reason she didn't delete the comment I linked to above (the one about her limited sympathy for actual people) was "because it shows how readily pro-choicers label pro-lifers inhumane."

I believe the rhetoric stands for itself.  And maybe she should check out Matthew 7:1-5.

UPDATE:  Guess someone didn't like the TrackBack ping I sent...

Comments

[czeltic girl]

*stunned silence*

The mind boggles.

Even though they're from different sides of the fence, I should maybe introduce these people to my old roommate, who talked her boyfriend into paying for her diaphragm and then frequently wouldn't use it because "it's oppressive to women". They could discuss logic.

[Valerie]

I support Dawn's position against only in that she has a right to express it. Other than that, I find her stance rather unfriendly towards women. It is to women's benefit that they have a choice of whether or not they want to have an abortion. Nothing anyone tells me will ever make me believe otherwise. I view it as a form of natural selection.

If you want to add religion to it and you believe that souls wait in heaven for bodies to inhabit then what happens to the vessels is irrelevant as long as people keep creating vessels.

Am I being too weird?

[Camille]

Sweet Jesus.

How can you come at a emotional, divisive topic like abortion with that level of sarcasm? That says to me that you don't really care. You don't want to engage in actual discussion, just to spew.

[Vidiot]

No, Val, you're not being weird.

I absolutely support Dawn's right to say whatever she wants.

And I will absolutely assert my right to point out that what she is saying is utterly insane.