any way they can both lose?

By Diogenes ( articles ) | Mar 07, 2007

In Boston, a woman is suing a local abortionist, because she had the baby despite the operation and now she thinks the doctor should pay for rearing the child.

If the suit is successful, the child-- now a 2-year-old girl-- will someday learn that her education has been subsidized by the man who was hired by Mom to dismember her. A lovely bit of information to comfort a child. The plaintiff's name, by the way, is "Raper." I'm not making this up.

But now consider the logic of the suit:

Dr. Allison Bryant, a physician working for Planned Parenthood at the time, performed the procedure on April 9, 2004, but it "was not done properly, causing the plaintiff to remain pregnant," according to the complaint.

Interesting view of causality there. Did the botched abortion cause the continued pregnancy? No; the doctor failed to end the pregnancy. Raper remained pregnant because, in the absence of an outside agency (i.e. a scalpel or suction machine) that's how nature arranged things. Pregnancy is not caused by an incomplete abortion. Not even at Planned Parenthood.

In other news, Joe Sixpack got drunk as a skunk last night, and this morning the Alka-Seltzer failed to kick in, "causing Joe to remain hung over." If he's fired from his job at the foundry because he can't stand the noise, should he sue Alka-Seltzer for lost wages?

Sound Off! CatholicCulture.org supporters weigh in.

All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

Show 2 Comments? (Hidden)Hide Comments
  • Posted by: wolfdavef3415 - May. 14, 2010 11:02 PM ET USA

    Yes, isn't reheated pedophilia the course du jour at the NYT?

  • Posted by: wolfdavef3415 - May. 14, 2010 11:01 PM ET USA

    Yes, isn't that the course du jour at the NYT?