[litany_of_lies]

The NYT is so radically pro-abort that it doesn't even see how letting this get published exposes such people as the self-absorbed jerks they really are to anyone with even an ounce of compassion.

"Is it possible to get rid of one of them? Or two of them?'' GET RID OF?

But now I'm going to have to move to Staten Island. I'll never leave my house because I'll have to care for these children. I'll have to start shopping only at Costco and buying big jars of mayonnaise. OH THE HUMANITY!

The procedure involves a shot of potassium chloride to the heart of the fetus. THE FETUS? THESE ARE YOUR BABIES WE ARE TALKING ABOUT!

Note how the concept of adoption never gets mentioned. Note how it's all about her "trauma" of carrying them (yeah, I'm a guy, and I'm sure it's difficult, but we're talking murder here). Note how his or her family helping out is never mentioned. Also note how no one is wondering what God wants.

So, pro-aborts, here's your poster child. Ya like how it looks?

[CaptainK]

It's amazing that someone would want a published record of this event and decision
She's worried Staten Island when she doesn't rise to Jerry Springer level.

[thegreatbeast]

The NYT is so radically pro-abort that it doesn't even see how letting this get published exposes such people as the self-absorbed jerks they really are to anyone with even an ounce of compassion.

Seriously, what do you suppose the Times was thinking exposing this terrible saga to the light of day?

[cupcakes]

Hey, no offense from this woman. I had 3 difficult pregnancies and I'm glad all 3 of my children are here and that includes a child that is disabled in the mix. I just can not conceive of it. I can see how as selfish sinful creatures(all of us) we would consider our convenience over an innocent life,but to go through with it and justify it in the terms she did(God forbid she have to shop in Cosco with 3 little ones at her heals--like you said--OH, the humanity!).

[utahagen]

I actually think the editors of the New York Times are evil geniuses. By publishing an article that dispassionately lays bare that this aboriton ended two lives, they are desensitizing people to that reality. The Times has given up (mostly) obscuring the fact that a pregnant woman is carrying a life inside her; now the Times is saying, "Abortion ends a human life. So what?"

[weegee]

So, pro-aborts, here's your poster child. Ya like how it looks?

I've already posted the "medical" excuses that the doctor would use to justify his actions. She kept the one who was up to 3 days older. They could have been struggling, she could have had complications, it could have given her mental stress worrying about it...

By the pro-aborts position, this would be classified as a "difficult pregnancy".