Pandagon's Amanda Marcotte writes in a comment to one of her own posts that she considers arguments against late-term abortions to be "red herrings":
Of course, I’m clearly unconvinced there’s a reason to restrict the vast majority of late term abortions, which are done to save a woman’s health or to remove a dead fetus, but that’s neither here nor there to my point about Red Herrings and Anti Choicers Who Won’t Admit They Don’t Have An Argument.The fascinating thing is that she's unconvinced only that there's a reason to restrict the "vast majority of late term abortions."
Why, if she believes in abortion on demand — a "right" that she regularly champions in her blog — is she not unconvinced there's a reason to restrict all late-term abortions?
With heavy heart, I suspect Ms. Marcotte will issue a swift response saying, in typically forthright manner, that I misunderstood her, and that there is never any valid reason to restrict abortions. But for now, I'm enjoying the moment.