I think it’s quite obvious from the date I am posting that his escape route was just a cowardly attempt to avoid being put on the spot. Great job getting under his skin by pointing out his mistakes.

A Catch-22 is of course a very different thing in which both options are not just mutually exclusive, but each is impossible without first doing the other.

Wilkow can get away with that mistake, but his demonstration of total intellectual vapidness is inexcusable. Answer the question, jerk!

I’m still debating whether the question is indeed a “Catch-22.”

I suppose that the “pro-lifer” sees this question as equivalent to asking if you’d save your son or daughter from a fire. Obviously, there is no “right” or “wrong” answer to that question.

So, if you’re convinced that life begins at the fertilizing of the egg, then I suppose you couldn’t term either choice “right” or “wrong.”

Of course, the point of the question is highlight (what seems to us pro-choice folks) the illogic of equating a clump of cells in a petri dish with a living child.

I suppose that it could be an effective “eye-opener” for some people except that believing life starts at conception seems to hinge on a matter of faith which, by definition, is immune to logic.

Sorry to be such a mealy-mouthed liberal intellectual.

If you were in a fertility clinic on fire, and there was a two year old child, and on the desk is a Petri dish with 20 unfertilized eggs next to a test tube of sperm, and you could only save one, do you:
a) Save the child, or
b) Go to the desk, dump the sperm onto the Petri dish and then save ‘20 human beings’.

I don’t care how screwed up and right winged this country becomes, any sane human being would SAVE THE CHILD!!!