Can someone help me destroy these 5 common arguments from Pro-Choicers?

[Crown_of_Stars]

I have started a thread, giving an apology for my hardness. I, as a woman, have never been pregnant and actually never wish to be. I understand. Yet it still doesn’t make harming an innocent child right. And that is why I get so hardened over it. Christ would *never *condone harming a child. At the most, I feel a woman can hope for a miscarriage. There. I’m through now on this topic.

 

[pensmama87]

You know, while I disagree very strongly with openmind77, I do think a lot of the responses to this thread are astonishingly tone deaf.

Yes, the facts are on our side, but man, the approach in these posts was what completely turned me off pro-life activism when I was young. Most people are in the squashy middle on abortion - they don’t like it but think it’s necessary sometimes, but would rather not think about it. Work with that. You can press, but be gentle. Find the compassion and start there.

We want to win hearts and save lives, here, not score points or shut someone up.

 

[josh987654321]

1. Never call those who support keeping abortion legal ‘pro-choice’ always call them ‘pro-abortion’

Yes, because ‘pro-choice’ is deceptive, as Wesrock put it ‘Pro-choice advocates frame the argument such that it’s life doesn’t start until birth. Why bring it into a painful world? Because at the point you’re considering it, it already is your child and is in the world. You’re not talking about preventing it from entering the world as a hypothetical, you’re talking of intentionally removing it by murder.’

1. Call them all murderers

I certainly don’t agree with calling women who have had an abortion, murderers and baby killers etc, but as for abortion, what else do you call it?

1. Better still, call them all baby-killers.

As above. And unfortunately, Abortion does kill a baby.

BTW it is interesting to note that it is ‘pro-life’ governors and legislators who are preventing three million poor, needy Americans from obtaining free healthcare through Medicaid expansion (provided almost entirely by the federal government).

The reason I would be against it is if ‘healthcare’ includes ‘abortion’ which isn’t healthcare at all, also, I would be all for Medicaid, but if it’s not there, you work to get it, you don’t give up and than opt to kill children in mothers wombs as a solution.

Even if it were there, do you think it would solve it? Even if we had the very best resources for women with unplanned pregnancy to keep their children, If abortion is the cheapest and easiest option, readily available and encouraged, nothing will change (Doesn’t mean we stop trying to have the best resources for women with unplanned pregnancies, just means that it must be a twofold approach here).

Also, a note of caution, if in your zeal to ‘save lives’ you happen to make the life of desperate, unfortunate women who seek an abortion, any more miserable and difficult than it already is, you will have to answer for your actions to the Christ whose Return is just around the corner. He may not be so pleased with your actions as you may have been led to believe and you can’t really argue with him.

Who are the ones keeping the abortion clinics up and running? arguing that one can/should choose such an option? how much blood is on their hands? Insensitive rhetoric against it may drive someone into the clinic, saying nothing will certainly land more at the clinics, but the ones who support the work the clinics do are far more guilty in my view.

I hope this has helped

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[josh987654321]

We want to win hearts and save lives, here, not score points or shut someone up.

True, any pointers for me?

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[Lea101]

It is like a echo chamber in here. You wouldn’t guess from all the responses that the world population supports keeping abortions legal by an overwhelming majority (with varying restrictions) (including in Catholic majority countries like Italy and France) and that only about six small countries prohibit it entirely. But since you asked the question, let me give you some zingers which are constantly being used by pro-life people:

1. Never call those who support keeping abortion legal ‘pro-choice’ always call them ‘pro-abortion’
2. Call them all murderers
3. Better still, call them all baby-killers.

I think those three are enough to destroy all pro-choice arguments.

BTW it is interesting to note that it is ‘pro-life’ governors and legislators who are preventing three million poor, needy Americans from obtaining free healthcare through Medicaid expansion (provided almost entirely by the federal government).

Also, a note of caution, if in your zeal to ‘save lives’ you happen to make the life of desperate, unfortunate women who seek an abortion, any more miserable and difficult than it already is, you will have to answer for your actions to the Christ whose Return is just around the corner. He may not be so pleased with your actions as you may have been led to believe and you can’t really argue with him.

You bring up valid points that pro life advocates tend to be really uncaring and harsh towards scared women. Pro life advocates need to lovingly provide resources to help these women instead of condemning them. Also perhaps work to prevent unplanned pregnancies (within catholic teaching) instead of just reacting

Some people have worked on this obria.org/ clinics like this encourage ultrasounds even for women who are considering abortions. Possibly to let these women hear the heartbeat, understand fetal development before making a huge decision. They also help women who have taken a pill to abort the baby by trying to reverse the effects, and if they can’t, they give help to women who regret abortions. They are pro women, definitely.

and yes, there are pro life advocates who only care about the fetus, but they have little to no regard about the lives of people of a different race/religion/etc (syria for instance), and so on. They find poor people annoying and act as if they are lazy, that they shouldn’t receive help from the government etc. It seems like they don’t care about life, huh?

But I would be a little shocked if you think these are reasons that abortion is okay/to be pro choice, since those are reasons that depends on the person’s character, not the stance on abortion. I can be pro life, and actually carry that out by helping as much people as I can. Fetuses AND dying people in war stricken countries/homeless people/etc.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Here are five “zingers” that Pro-Choice people use to try to put Pro-Lifers in an awkward spot with their anti-abortion argument.

1. A woman has the right to choose what she does with her body.

Without limit? Until very recently, suicide was illegal…though few people who attempted to kill themselves were actually prosecuted. But okay…let’s stipulate this to be true.

The child is a part of her body that is formed by her…to say she can’t abort is to say she can’t choose to do what she wants with her body.

If true, why does this change once the child is born? It would remain true that the child was [formerly] a “part of her body that is formed by her”. Consequently, shouldn’t she have the right to do with her two-day old or two-year old body part as she chooses?

1. If the woman was raped, that can cause psychological problems and will cause her to have flashbacks at the sight of the child and will also likely lead to the mother abusing/hating the child. Most women who were raped and had an abortion feel a since of relief after getting rid of the “rape baby”

This argument assumes the worst as inevitable. But how does adding the killing of an innocent child make the rape victim feel better?

Being raped was beyond her control; she bears no guilt for that act. Killing the unborn child is completely her free choice, and there is no escape from the guilt of that act.

Finally, it is completely understandable that the child may cause emotional or financial difficulties for the woman unprepared to deal with raising the child. Consequently, adoption is an option.

1. If it doesn’t have a heartbeat nor can think for itself, it’s not alive, so its not murder.

What is the definition of alive? Plants don’t have a heartbeat nor can they think. Yet we speak of “killing trees” in the rainforests all the time.

1. Adoption is a poor option. Statistics show that foster care here in America is very bad and the child will suffer abuse, neglect, etc. It’s better that they aren’t born at all then put in foster care.

Foster care and adoption are two different things, and not every orphaned child grows up like Oliver Twist. The world is full of people leading happy, productive lives after being adopted or growing up in an orphanage.

Here’s a short list of some famous examples:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_orphans_and_foundlings

1. Why should a child be forced to be birthed by a mother that is going to abuse, neglect, hate, and psychologically damage it?

The assumption is that the mother is NECESSARILY going to be abusive. Why? The personal making the argument seems to have little regard for the woman’s capacity for love.

 

[Reepicheep]

1. A woman has the right to choose what she does with her body. The child is a part of her body that is formed by her…to say she can’t abort is to say she can’t choose to do what she wants with her body.

a) A woman may do what she likes with her own body. The baby is not part of her body; the baby is an entirely new body temporarily living inside hers. Am I only a part of my apartment building because I live inside it?

b)To say she can’t abort is to say she can’t kill a baby because being pregnant is troublesome to her.

1. If the woman was raped, that can cause psychological problems and will cause her to have flashbacks at the sight of the child and will also likely lead to the mother abusing/hating the child. Most women who were raped and had an abortion feel a since of relief after getting rid of the “rape baby”

a) Give birth and give it up for adoption. ‘Abort or be chained for life to the unwanted baby’ is a false dilemna.

b) Women who abort feel good about ‘getting rid of the baby’.
‘I feel good when I do this’ is not in the least a proof that ‘doing this’ is right or good.
Drug abusers feel good when they get high. Drug abuse is still a bad thing.

c) The baby did not commit rape. Why should it get the death penalty for it?

1. If it doesn’t have a heartbeat nor can think for itself, it’s not alive, so its not murder.

a) A man in a coma can’t think for himself. Does he lose his rights once he loses consciousness?
b) Embryos do in fact have a heartbeat early in the pregnancy.
c) If not interfered with it will grow into first a child, then a teen, then an adult. How can it not be alive?

1. Adoption is a poor option. Statistics show that foster care here in America is very bad and the child will suffer abuse, neglect, etc. It’s better that they aren’t born at all then put in foster care.

a) If adoption is a poor option then let’s work to make it a better one.
b) …Citation needed. What’s your evidence that adoption is such a poor option?
c) You cite foster care, but foster care is not adoption.
d) By what authority do you declare that it’s better never to have lived than to endure suffering?

1. Why should a child be forced to be birthed by a mother that is going to abuse, neglect, hate, and psychologically damage it?

a) How is it better that the child be forced to be killed?
b) If the mother doesn’t want the child then let the child be adopted by someone else. Kill it or abuse it are not the only choices.

 

[openmind77]

…
But I would be a little shocked if you think these are reasons that abortion is okay/to be pro choice, since those are reasons that depends on the person’s character, not the stance on abortion. I can be pro life, and actually carry that out by helping as much people as I can. Fetuses AND dying people in war stricken countries/homeless people/etc.

I did not say that the way pro-life treat pregnant women who seek abortion, is the reason to be pro-choice. The reasons are already enumerated in the OP’s post - among those, the reasons that really count are the woman’s right to control her own body and that the fetus is not a person.

Also, there is nothing wrong in being pro-life and working with the intention of helping people. But if the intention is to harass or intimidate desperate women who wish to exercise their legal right, make life difficult and miserable for them and prevent them by such actions from exercising their rights, then those actions will have to answered for to the Christ when he Returns (quite soon).

Being pro-choice does not mean anyone is advocating abortions. It just means that the woman’s right to have autonomy and control over her own body should not be violated. As for the fetus’s right to be born - I know the Catholic Church may not believe this, but all that happens after an abortion is that the soul which was to be born, is scheduled for a later birth (and possibly a better birth or better life).

 

[Crown_of_Stars]

The Mother of Christ, the Virgin Madonna, has given many warnings on the evil of abortion, and what will happen to the world if she does not change her ways.