Believe it or not, we're actually trying to make a serious point in the cartoon above (with a tip of our hat to Jonathan Swift and his "modest proposal").
Considering the nightmarish abortion laws being pushed and passed (something that fewer and fewer babies will get to experience), just what is the difference between going Texas Chainsaw Massacre on a baby in the process of being born, or slicing and dicing a gentleman's johnson which happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time?
Both baby and man are separate individuals from the woman, with their own DNA, blood type, heart beat, and hopes to survive the experience of intimate contact with a woman. Both are presumably someplace where they were invited by the woman to be. And both are intended by nature to be pulled intact out of a vagina in order to go on with the rest of their lives.
Granted, our example is extreme - but where is the error in our thinking? We've certainly got science and biology on our side. The only difference is legal (ie, semantic) - and the apparent belief that life itself should be defined by neither physicians, philosophers, nor theologians - but by politicians. Who are technically the lowest life forms on Earth.
FROM THE VAULT...
Happy Birthday to my father (who art in Heaven, albeit not necessarily the fanciest part, and quite likely on probation). He was conceived under circumstances which would likely lead to an abortion these days (the product of my paternal grandmother and a traveling piano teacher who apparently also gave organ lessons), and I'm damn glad he made it into this world. He created a lifetime of happiness for a lot of people.