The substance of this argument is essentially "If you don't support every social policy I do then you do not have any basis to object to what you believe to be murder."
Obviously absurd and far beneath the level of rigor I'd expect on HN.
Obviously absurd and far beneath the level of rigor I'd expect on HN.
Because, if protecting life was truly the goal you are after, then you'd do a whole lot more to actually, you know, protect life, long after the child is born.