Pro-life activist Jill Stanek recently reported an unsettling story about a “pro-choice” woman’s twitter posting of some disgustingly disturbing cookies she baked.
Abortion advocate Rachel Joy Larris baked up some “bloody fetus” cookies and posted them to her twitter account with the captions:
“#prochoice friends don’t hate me. These cookies just inspire my evil side. *grin*”
“Evil FETUS COOKIES!!! Cause #prochoice means you EAT babies, don’tyaknow #prolife”
Ha, ha. Wow. This is hilariously clever. If by “hilariously clever” you mean twisted and demonic.
I thought “pro-choicers” were bent on convincing an unsuspecting public that what gets killed in an abortion is a clump of cells, a shrimp, a starfish ... anything but a human baby.
But here we have a “pro-choice” activist embracing the baby, baking up mini babies, using frosting to represent the bloody stumps left after their limbs have been torn off, and giggling as she posts them on the internet.
This is someone who cares about women and babies?
In self-defense in the combox at Stanek’s blog, Rachel Joy Larris offers this excuse:
“But are fetus-shaped cookies really MORE offensive than gingerbread men? I mean in that case your eating a WHOLE LIVE PERSON, which seems to me should be much worse.”
I will pretend that Ms. Larris truly does not see the difference between bloody fetus cookies and gingerbread men and enlighten her:
If gingerbread men represented an entire class of innocent human beings that are violently killed daily by the thousands for the crime of being “unwanted,” and if they bore bloody details of their murders, and if heartless people laughingly posted about their destruction on the internet, there would be no difference at all.