Abortion foes use Peterson case. This AP article appeared in many places (CNN, ABC, et al) over the weekend and today.
The general idea is that the pro-life movement is exploiting this death in order to make a political point. Two paragraphs from the article:
"'In the Peterson case, I've heard no one go on radio or TV and say there shouldn't be an indictment for the death of that child,' said Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, the bill's chief Senate sponsor. 'The fact is there are two victims -- it's a fiction to say there aren't.'
Abortion-rights activists counter the gruesome murder case is being exploited callously as part of a broad strategy to undermine the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion."
When they respond this way, abortion rights activists appear to be saying that ultimately it endangers first-trimester abortion rights if fetuses at any stage are granted legal rights.
They'd surely be in a stronger position if they could say, "First-trimester abortions are completely different in principle from 8-month old fetuses; therefore, giving legal rights to 8-month-old fetuses does nothing at all to endanger the reasons why we think it is okay to end 8-week pregnancies."
Their evident belief that it is one short step from thinking that Connor was a real baby who was killed to the repeal of Roe v Wade makes me wonder about what THEY think is the difference between an 8-month-old fetus and an 8-week old fetus.