Are lobsters more important than babies?

The Globe and Mail is worried about lobsters feeling pain when it's cooking. Oh brother.

What about babies feeling pain when they are aborted. Is the G&M worried about that?

Prof. Elwood says that:
“The advantage of pain is that it trains your attention to what caused it so you can learn and change your behaviour in the future."

The pain a child feels as it is being ripped from it's mother's body never gets the chance to change its behaviour, since the baby is soon, you know, dead.

“It shows clearly that the animals are learning, they’re discriminating between a safe area and an area that isn’t, It’s a criterion that has been tested and been found to be consistent with pain.”

The child never gets the chance to learn to find any "safe area", since none exists during an abortion. Lucky animals.

"While mammals are given some measure of consideration when they are slaughtered, it is common for crustaceans to have their bodies ripped while alive, Prof. Elwood noted.

But not the baby mammal of the human species, not a whole whack of "consideration" there. Not while they are being "slaughtered" and having "their bodies ripped apart".

“An unmentionably large number are abused in extreme ways and perhaps through this experiment there might be some changes in attitudes and practices.”

Wow. Do we as a species, actually care more about a lobster being boiled, than a about a baby being dismembered, disemboweled and decapitated? Now that is "abuse in extreme ways".

And changes in "attitudes and practices"? Bring it on I say. Save the baby. Boil the lobster.