Can you find the contradiction?

[1BearkatTexan]

When I first found this picture I thought, "Cool way to communicate the Pro-Life Message by claiming your baby is pro-choice."
I found out from the San Fran newspaper of which this picture comes from that this woman is actually for abortion. Soooooo yeah, ummmm where to start on this one... I do not know. Any takers? I guess there is not much to say other than this is one confused individual.

[Kelsey Hazzard]

A better picture I've seen is an infant wearing a shirt that says "Now that I'm safe, I'm pro-choice." Obviously that one's pro-life, with just the right amount of tongue-in-cheek :-)

[1BearkatTexan]

Sounds cute, but with such progressively progressed lunacy of our Infancidal U.S. President and Planned Parenthood who knows how long that infant is safe?

I talked to one girl last week and she explained that if a baby isn't able to breathe on it's own then it should die. I was ten inches away from calling her a "heartless .....shush yo mouth" lol!
Instead, I asked her if she also thought we should hold that if an infant isn't old enough to run away from danger then does "it" deserves to die? I explained "With the logic in your argument maybe, if a child didn't learn on "it's" own to not play in the street and "it" gets hit by a thoughtless driver who feels the same way as you, then we should argue that "it" too deserves to die." She looked confused and the other pro-lifers admitted they didn't know where I was going with it either, but oh well.
Apparently, nobody cares about philosophy anymore. (sigh)
Hence the ridiculous contradiction in that picture.

[Ryan Barnett]

You could have also told her that does a person in a coma deserve to die simply because he or she cant breathe on their own.

1BearkatTexan said:

Sounds cute, but with such progressively progressed lunacy of our Infancidal U.S. President and Planned Parenthood who knows how long that infant is safe?

I talked to one girl last week and she explained that if a baby isn't able to breathe on it's own then it should die. I was ten inches away from calling her a "heartless .....shush yo mouth" lol!
Instead, I asked her if she also thought we should hold that if an infant isn't old enough to run away from danger then does "it" deserves to die? I explained "With the logic in your argument maybe, if a child didn't learn on "it's" own to not play in the street and "it" gets hit by a thoughtless driver who feels the same way as you, then we should argue that "it" too deserves to die." She looked confused and the other pro-lifers admitted they didn't know where I was going with it either, but oh well.
Apparently, nobody cares about philosophy anymore. (sigh)
Hence the ridiculous contradiction in that picture.

[1BearkatTexan]

Very smart. I will remember that for next time.

[Somel]

Ha! I love it! Just goes to show you that any line we draw to separate a non-human fetus from a human with rights is arbitrary.