A month after first learning of the atrocities of what abortion really is, I decided to delve into researching the child’s life before they take their first breath. Then, I decided from that moment on I would be a pro-life advocate. Defending the rights of the most innocent and helpless. As time went on, I spoke to more and more people who were pro-choice or somewhere in the middle. I noticed they all had very similar, if not the same arguments and I began even more research to see if I could debunk them and here they are, the completed list of common pro-choice claims debunked.
The dilemma:
I get asked all the time by pro-choice advocates, would I save an embryo or a 5-year-old child if they both ended up in some bizarre situation where I would have to choose to save one or the other. Choosing between two lives is a dilemma that is as old as time. Prochoice advocates have simply presented this dilemma in a different way. What makes it particularly difficult is that both choices are the right and wrong decision because one of them will die and it will be your fault. For pro-life advocates, we believe the unborn child is valuable and so is the 5-year-old which cause us to falter and have difficulty choosing between the two innocent lives. However, pro-choice advocates see no intrinsic value in an unborn child making this decision easy… for them. When I was first presented with this question, I was tricked by their terminology. As a blossoming advocate, I didn’t realize embryo meant unborn child, so I said the 5-year-old with ease causing the person I was debating to feel as though they had bested me. Don’t get caught in the same trap. It just isn’t that simple. Either person you chose to save, will discredit your humanity because it is an inhumane dilemma. Choosing who lives and who dies is a decision no one should get to make. Yet they use this time and time again.
The reason this argument works for the pro-choice movement is that any generic response will make you look bad. If you chose the “embryo” then they will say you care more about the unborn than the born, however if you choose the child, they believe you proved their point in choosing someone who is born over someone who is unborn. Meaning your answer would have to resemble something like this: This dilemma has virtually nothing to do with abortion because a 5-year-old Is not involved in any way and you are not choosing between two lives.
Abortion is the act of killing an unborn child. No ultimatum, no salvation for anyone, no mysterious fire or one antidote for two people. There is no saving anyone; you are making a choice that will kill an unborn child. Making this argument pointless and obsolete.
By simply changing what they call the child in the womb, they have changed the way our culture views abortion and somehow have found a way to justify it by using phrases like. “gently empty out your uterus.” Instead of explaining what actually happens in an abortion, which is not gentle and definitely does not just empty out the uterus. Abortion procedures are gruesome and painful for both people involved. Whether it is the surgical abortion or the medically induced abortion which cuts the child off from the nutrients they need essentially starving them before the other part of the pill kicks in and sends clumps of the dead child out of the woman. I know it’s not pretty but it’s true and if abortion is the right choice then why don’t the people at places like planned parenthood tell everyone the truth rather than manipulate the language they use when describing abortions and the child.
Moment of conception = a child:
Some people believe a child becomes a child when their heartbeat starts or maybe even later. However, if you place when the child becomes a human at any other time than conception, you hit a wall. The heartbeat is a more reasonable time than when they feel pain etc. but it has its flaws as well. Namely there are a multitude of machines that can artificially make the heartbeat, like the implantable cardioverter defibrillator which is surgically implanted to give the heart electric counter-shocks when an abnormal heartbeat rhythm is detected. There are numerous other machines that help the heart do its job or even do the hearts job entirely including the cardiac resynchronization therapy, left ventricle assist device and total artificial hearts. As technology advances, our ability to survive without a natural heartbeat improves. We cannot measure someone’s humanity by their heartbeat because technology can artificially create one. People whose hearts have begun failing and require artificial heartbeats are no less human than people who have fully functioning hearts. Therefore, believing that an unborn child is living when they have a heartbeat is flawed because technology can create a heartbeat and technology cannot create a life.
Some people like to claim when they feel pain, they become human. That does not work because people with anhidrosis, leprosy or nerve damage cannot feel pain and they are no less human than those of us who can feel pain. If only people with the ability to feel pain were human, we would be able to kill those with the disabilities I mentioned previously. That is cruel and downright wrong.
When the child can live on its own is another favorite of the pro-choice crowd. A 2-year-old cannot live without the help of someone and they still deserve the right to life. Being dependent on others doesn’t make you inhuman, actually it makes you human. In our society we thrive and rely on hers. We can’t do everything on our own and it would be really lonely if we could. The baby in the womb does rely on their mother and that doesn’t make them disposable or a parasite.
Lastly, when they can breathe. I find myself shocked every time I hear this. There is nothing magical about oxygen that suddenly makes a person alive. They child in the womb already had lungs they simply had no access to the air from outside. People who become seriously injured or have to go under anesthesia cannot breathe without a breathing tube or the medical term for it: Intubation. They cannot breathe but they are still human. They did not become worthless during the procedure and when they could breathe again, they did not suddenly become a human being, they have been a human being worthy of life since conception and their situation did not change that. Meaning a child in the womb’s value did not change when they were born, they simply changed location and were just as worthy of life in the womb as they are outside of the womb.
My baby not my choice:
Nearly every pro-life advocate has heard. “My body, my choice.” And if you haven’t, you will. It is essentially the slogan for the pro-choice movement. When a movement is based on manipulation and lies, you can bet the slogan will be misleading too and regarding the pro-choice movement it is. When a baby is in the womb, they are not part of the woman’s body. If that were the case, technically during pregnancy, a woman would have 4 arms, 4 legs, 2 hearts etc. Seems silly to think about but if that’s the slogan they want out there, they will get a silly response to go along with their silly slogan. The woman is not the one who’s tiny body is ripped limb from limb nor head and spine are crushed. Tears streaked down my face as I wrote that sentence because I cannot imagine anyone truly believing doing that to a child or anyone should be legal. Anyhow, it is not your body and you had your choice. When a woman decides to have intercourse, she is accepting the fact that a child could result which in turn means if she gets pregnant, she must take responsibility and keep the child, put them up for adoption or give them to a family member but not pay money to have them slaughtered in one of the most gruesome ways possible.
Just because it’s legal doesn’t make it right.
Civil rights leader, Martin Luther King Jr. said that. Of course, he was talking about a different injustice, but it still applies here. Slavery at a time was legal and that was horribly wrong. Murder at one point in different countries was totally legal. Abusing your wife and children was completely legal at one point. In each of these instances, lawmakers allowed evil and wrong actions to be seen as just under the law and that is exactly what is happening with abortion. We are allowing the temptation of convenience to tempt us into legalizing murder. Many pro-choice advocates have a snappy comeback to this, “If abortion was illegal then women would have to resort to unsafe coat hanger abortions.” The coat hanger has become a popular symbol among the pro-choice movement however it is based on a myth.
A Planned Parenthood medical director named Mary S. Calderone said this regarding how illegal abortions were being performed.
“In 1955, [While abortion was still illegal] it was exhaustively contemplated by 43 men and women from the various disciplines of obstetrics, psychiatry, public health, sociology, forensic medicine, and law and demography… the conference estimated that 90 per cent of all illegal abortions are presently being done by physicians. Call them what you will, abortionists or anything else, they are still physicians, trained as such; and many of them are in good standing in their communities. They must do a pretty good job if the death rate is as low as it is. Whatever trouble arises usually comes after self-induced abortions, which comprise approximately 8 per cent, or with the very small percentage that go to some kind of nonmedical abortionist.” (1)
The harsh reality about banning abortion is that abortions will still take place. However, fewer will occur and abortion will no longer be praised by the society it has established. One that thrives off convenience and whatever or in abortion’s case, whoever gets in the way will become disposable and unimportant.
Being pro-life is not anti-woman:
People in the pro-life movement are commonly criticized for being. “anti-woman.” Not only is this offensive considering most pro-lifers love each person, it draws attention away from the argument. Do not get trapped by these unwarranted claims and find yourself hours later regretting that you hadn’t stayed on topic and that all the research you had done didn’t matter because you found yourself arguing about feminism instead of why the unborn must be protected. I speak from experience.
Calling someone anti-woman is harsh and rude. Pro-life people tend to focus on the unborn children because they are the ones in immediate danger. But if we want to protect the unborn correctly, we must care for the mother as well. Lots of pro-life organizations offer the mother help like giving her formula, baby beds, diapers etc. and services including parental training or assist them in finding people to adopt their child if they cannot take care of them. Pro-life people do care about women, but we are not willing to stay silent about the slaughter behind closed doors in order to make the mother feel convenienced and comfortable. We love them and the child and want to help them both not one or the other.
In conclusion:
“Defend the Unborn against abortion even if they persecute you, calumniate you, set traps for you, take you to court or kill you.” – Pope Francis
the pro-choice movement has made many claims, accusations and arguments and almost all of them are unfounded. Stay strong and keep fighting for the world’s most innocent and precious they need it. Especially considering abortion is legal in 81.2 % of all countries in the world.
Sources
- Illegal Abortion as a Public Health Problem American Journal of Public Health and the Nations Health, 50(7), 948–954 (July 1960). DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.50.7.948.
