But they're actually saving them!

I checked out the blog abortionclinicdays again, and was floored by the posting over there now. Acorrding to the most recent post over there, abortion actually does the aborted children (or as she de-humanizes them "pregnancies") a favor by saving them from lives of poverty.

She states:

They wanted their pregnancy, they loved their pregnancy, but they could not in good conscience ask their child to suffer the same poverty they were suffering.

First of all, it is a child, not a pregnancy. A slip-up she makes here. Secondly, she tries a justification defense that we are "saving" a person from a life of poverty. Apparently poverty is so horrible that it is better for a child to die than live in it. However, kill your born children and try this defense and you will be laughed out of court. It's called loving your child to death, the same thing Andrea Yates did, she loved her children to much to let them fall prey to the "devil". More of the hypocricy of feminism that one is called a victim and another a murderer.

She goes on to state that until we take care of the children we have, then killing the unborn is acceptable so as not to add to societies burden. (The Nazis called this "Life unworthy of life") And that we should reform adoption laws (which I agree with her)

The fact that a blonde, blue-eyed baby is exponentially more likely to be adopted than a six year-old child of color is an American tragedy. The fact that children with disabilities of any age or ethnicity are lost in the system is an American tragedy.

And why is that white children are more likely to be adopted? It is because the overwhelming majority of potential adoptive parents are white and the majority of adoptable children are minorities. So is racism to blame? No actually, it is because so many "liberals" refuse to de-segregate the adoption process. Trans-racial adoption and foster care is not allowed in most states. Conservatives and family groups for years have called for this, but liberal groups will not allow it to happen, even in her article Ms. Varian does not call to lift restrictions on race, but she does on every other demographic:

We need to recognize the beauty of all kinds of family structures and stop preventing perfectly loving people from adopting and fostering children because they are single, gay, or otherwise non-nuclear.

But to prevent perfectly loving people from adopting based on race is perfectly ok.

I could go on, but read the article and you will see the rhetoric.

Oh, and of course this woman needs to throw it in that she was raised a "devout Catholic".