Ms Clinton equates Pro-Life with Terrorism

For John, BLUF:  I think Senator Clinton just got carried away with her rhetoric; at least I hope that is the case.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Hillary Clinton Says Saving Unborn Babies from Abortion Is Like…Terrorists Killing, Raping Women

From , by Reporter Catherine Salgado, 27 December 2022, 4:06 PM.

Here is the lede plus one:

Iranian protests against oppressive, misogynistic laws have led to over 14,000 arrests and a government decision to execute an unknown number of protestors.  Afghanistan’s ruling power, the terrorist Taliban, murders, rapes, and abuses women on a daily basis.  Russian soldiers reportedly weaponized rape in Ukraine.  All of which, in Hillary Clinton’s mind, is equivalent to Arkansas’s pro-life legislation restricting the abortion of innocent unborn babies.

Most of us did a double take on that, but not PBS’s Christiane Amanpour.  When failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton went on Amanpour and Company to discuss the women’s rights summit the Clinton Presidential Center is hosting, Amanpour didn’t seem disturbed by Hillary equating the saving of unborn babies with raping and shooting women, according to LifeNews.

Amanpour asked Clinton about the “unfinished business” of women’s rights, and Hillary knew exactly which countries to bash.  “But we are also in a period of time where there is a lot of pushback and much of the progress that has been, I think, taken for granted by too many people is under attack,” Clinton pontificated. “Literally under attack in places like Iran or Afghanistan or Ukraine, where rape is a tactic of war, or under attacks by political and cultural forces in a country like our own when it comes to women’s health care and bodily autonomy.”  Because pro-lifers are so similar to the Taliban!

We don't really think that Senator Clinton equates Pro-Life people with Terrorists, do we?  That would be equating criminal activity with the right of the State to protect, at some point, the life of an unborn child for the convenience of the Mother carrying the child.  That seems like an unbalanced argument.

In our pluralistic society it does not seem unreasonable to allow abortion to save the life of the Mother, or, early on, in the event of rape.  Incest as a separate category ignores that it is usully rape, and when it is consenual the idea of abortion sounds more like eugenics.  At some point the child conceived should begin to gather his or her own rights.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff