Upon reading Nicolas Tomboulides' article "Unborn fetuses need help akin to abolitionist movement", I was appalled to see that the University of Connecticut is allowing such hateful anti-women propaganda to be published in its paper. Comparing women to slave owners is not only completely unacceptable, it's just plain wrong. Consider the world Nicolas envisions, where any woman who becomes pregnant is forced to carry the fetus to term. Does this not make her a slave, forced to use her body's resources to support the organism within her? If we follow Nicolas' analogy, it is the fetus that is the slave owner, not the woman. The additional ad hominem barb against Planned Parenthood only serves to further prove Nicolas' anti-women stance: The views of any prominent member of Planned Parenthood do not change that fact that it provides live-saving support to women.
Comments 1
Upon reading Nicolas Tomboulides' article "Unborn fetuses need help akin to abolitionist movement", I was appalled to see that the University of Connecticut is allowing such hateful anti-women propaganda to be published in its paper. Comparing women to slave owners is not only completely unacceptable, it's just plain wrong. Consider the world Nicolas envisions, where any woman who becomes pregnant is forced to carry the fetus to term. Does this not make her a slave, forced to use her body's resources to support the organism within her? If we follow Nicolas' analogy, it is the fetus that is the slave owner, not the woman. The additional ad hominem barb against Planned Parenthood only serves to further prove Nicolas' anti-women stance: The views of any prominent member of Planned Parenthood do not change that fact that it provides live-saving support to women.
Reply
Leave a comment