Like Chris, I used to rail against that line about babies using moms as pacifiers.  Now I just calmly explain that of course breasts were the model for pacifiers, when the major switch to bottle feeding took place and it was necessary to come up with a way for bottle-fed babies to get the comfort sucking they needed.  Most people ask why it was necessary to devise something different, and that provides me with an opportunity to explain how breastfed babies can suckle the breast even when they're not hungry, without overloading their little bellies with excess milk or air, as would happen with either a fuller or an empty bottle.  Most people - my beloved bosses (pediatricians) among them, never even stopped to consider that pacifiers were a substitute developed for use when a breast wasn't available to meet the natural need!  Those mothers who *wanted* to nurture their babies at the breast (and as you have all no doubt sadly accepted, that is *not* what all breastfeeding mothers have in mind), but were getting the idea that it was improper, gain the insight they need to make the choice to be "used as a pacifier".
Must admit, I do HATE those dopey looking things dangling from children's mouths (making them look dopey, too).  I try to take the opportunity to call them "dummies", a much better name for them.  I am angered by the way that they are used, not just to provide some needed non-nutritive sucking time, but to constantly "shut up" babies who fuss, whine, cry or otherwise demand attention, in place of considering what they might be needing, and seeing if we could give them that...
OK, I'll stop preaching to the choir now....

Willow (RN, IBCLC), in chilly Detroit, MI