Friday, May 5, 2017

Strange Notion of Permission

A pro-choice professor accused pro-life organizations of “child pornography” for using images of dead fetuses as a rhetorical device during a debate at Purdue University.
At an April 24 debate hosted by the Boilermakers for Life student organization, David Sanders, an associate professor of Biology at Purdue, accused his interlocutor of “child pornography” for showing “images of fetuses” when defending his pro-life views....
“What would you call the public display of a butt naked body of a child?” Sanders questioned. “I would call it child pornography. Do they have their permission? Do they have the permission of the fetus? Obviously not.”
Nor did anyone ask their permission to be aborted.  I rather doubt that they would have given it.

1 comment:

  1. Since he seems to be the first to have connected the term to aborted fetuses*, he also seems to be the one who finds such tnings sexually arousing.perhaps he should be a registered sex offender. It is a crime to desecrate a corpse, and since he deems it child porn, I think that's enough ambiguity to put him in the short eyes list.

    * considering that the only time someone uses the term "fetus" is after the decision to abort the "tissue" has been made, fetus is hate speech, like other insulting words, the object is less than human and may be treated as waste.