Pro-womens-shelters don't actually believe that a woman is the moral equivalent of a man – if they did, there would certainly be major pushes for research on why more than 12% of all these "cellular human beings" contract a gender-specific life-threatening cancer. (Imagine if more than one in eight men contracted cancer from their man parts - we wouldn't just shrug our shoulders and say, "Well that's nature!") What they do believe is that homelessness has given women too much freedom.
Therefore advocates of women's shelters are liars and don't really believe that women are people. LOGIC!
The unstated (asinine) assumption is that anyone who doesn't give all of their money to SIDS research
thinks that infants aren't people. You don't personally research breast cancer? You must hate women. Never mind that you're actively trying to stop others from killing them. I reject your reality and substitute my own.
It took me like 3 minutes to read this, then I figured out that I should stop, since it's not me being stupid, but your metaphor not working at all.
Find me someone who supports women's shelters who thinks breast cancer is an acceptable part of life, and not something we should work very hard to cure. Want to bet that people pushing for more breast cancer research intersect pretty strongly with the people who support women's shelters? Huge deals are made out of cancer! Breast cancer is probably the most high profile disease in the US, if not the world.
Extremely little is made out of that the majority of fertilized eggs don't even result in pregnancies. If we counted fertilized eggs as people for legal purposes, why not ethical, medical and scientific purposes? Did you know the average american lives to be 25 years old (since most die when they are negative 9 months)? It's fine if you're not making a big deal about SIDS. But if you start a serious crusade against what you consider to be the horrible problem of infant-murderers, and meanwhile, SIDS starts killing over 50% of the infant population, I'd at least question your motivation.
Stepping out of weird metaphor land, the original article was very good (Jill Filipovic is consistently awesome). Conservatives and liberals both understand that there are two truths, but for some reason liberals never seem to get which one actually matters. Thus conservatives get to run circles around us on the name-game.