woman-girl-question

What are some assumptions about pro-lifers?

Sometimes when I’m discussing the abortion issue with others who do not hold the same views, it blows my mind to hear what they think of me and of pro-lifers. To make assumptions about your opponent though, especially if such assumptions are untrue, doesn’t exactly make you the stronger person, especially if you have to resort to cheap shots such as the ones I’ve heard of and experienced, and which others I have consulted from Fordham’s Respect for Life came up with.

Pro-lifers are anti-women:

People claim that because pro-lifers don’t think a woman should be able to choose an abortion, they thus hate women. In one discussion over Facebook, someone pointed out that my pro-life view basically amounted to “…F*** women wanting to do whatever they please with their own bodies amirite?” (asterisks added). And thus if you don’t think a woman should have the choice of an abortion, then you’re saying that they can’t do what they want with their own bodies and make their own choices. Heck, you probably just want to control them, because again, you hate women. And you probably hate women having sex, and sex in general. Which brings me to my next point.

Pro-lifers are prudes and virgins:

Okay, so many pro-lifers that I’ve met or heard about are committed to, or at least have considered committing to, staying virgins until marriage. But you don’t need to be pro-life to stay a virgin until marriage, and you don’t need to stay a virgin until marriage to be pro-life. There are many reasons one may choose abstinence, and one of them is to absolutely ensure no children are born until they can be provided for by a husband and wife who are ready and able to give their child both a father and a mother. That reason pretty much makes sense to me. And (if we’re purely speaking about unplanned pregnancies out-of-wedlock) if there’s never any sex outside of marriage, then there’s no unplanned pregnancies to worry about where one has to consider an abortion. At the same time though, not all pro-lifers are virgins. Some are virgins, though they may not necessarily wait until marriage. Some are sexually active but aware of possible consequences of sex and would own up to raising a child or place him or her up for adoption. Others have previously been sexually active and have re-committed themselves to living a more sexually pure lifestyle. But whatever kind of sexual experience a pro-lifer has had, such experience does not speak to all, and it does not make them any more or less devoted as a pro-lifer.

Pro-lifers are religious zealots:

There are many pro-lifers who like to take a religious approach to being pro-life. The Catholic Church, for instance, has pro-life offices advertised on websites for its dioceses. To be pro-life and to affirm that life begins at conception is not based solely on a personal or religious belief. Otherwise, to be pro-life would just be based on beliefs that could merely be sincerely held. Also, any time someone tries to lump pro-lifers together as Christians, or with any other religious group, they’re really just too lazy to do some research and find out about groups such as Secular Pro-Life.

Pro-lifers are Republican:

The Republican party does have a platform that is pro-life. And the Democratic party does have a platform that is pro-abortion. But I will tell you, even as someone who is a Republican, you do not have to be a Republican to be pro-life. I will accept anybody into the movement, and the pro-life movement largely as a whole does as well, who believes in fighting for the unborn, regardless of your political beliefs. There is an organization, Democrats for Life of America. The Bipartisan Congressional Pro-life Caucus in Congress is co-chaired by a Democrat, Rep. Dan Lipinski of Illinois. Oh and there are also groups such as Republicans for Choice and Republican Majority for Choice.

Pro-life men don’t deserve an opinion:

This is perhaps one of the more tragic examples. As my friend Kevin put it, you are “not allowed to have an opinion if you have male genitals.” It is true that a woman bears the burden and the gift of carrying a child in her womb for nine months. That is just how biology works. Women can get pregnant, men cannot. But, that does not mean that women get pregnant by themselves. A baby is conceived when a sperm and an egg come together. I don’t wish to give pro-choicers a biology lesson in reminding them that sperm comes from a man and eggs come from women, but it is basic science to understand how babies are conceived. Also, I believe that to say if you’re a man you can’t have an opinion on abortion because you can’t get pregnant is the more sexist view to hold. Everyone is entitled to have an opinion. Those men who are pro-life and who fight for their unborn children and the unborn children of others could not be more brave; they also realize their roles as men who have a duty to protect women and children. That friend of mine, Kevin? He is one of the most devout pro-lifers I know, as are Tom and Brendan, who served on Fordham’s Respect for Life e-board. The fact that they are men and can’t get pregnant should have nothing to do with standing up for everyone to have the right to life.

Pro-lifers are really just anti-choice:

Many pro-choicers like to throw around the term anti-choice, I suppose to demonize their opponents and make themselves sound better, by drawing a stark contrast to their own side. I’ve decided to not let it bother me anymore, because it says more about them and how they treat those who disagree with them rather than myself and my movement. But to say someone is anti-choice, and have it carry a negative connotation, because they disagree with a choice that kills a human person, is disingenuous. How about adoption? That’s certainly a choice. And how about let’s consider why people may be “anti” when it comes to such a “choice” such as abortion?

Pro-lifers think that everyone else should have to subscribe to their morality:

The same person on Facebook who made the “…F*** women…” comment also sarcastically mentioned that everyone should have to subscribe to my morality. While I do wish that everyone would be pro-life, I know it is unrealistic to expect every single person to hold my same beliefs, on abortion or otherwise. There are even differing opinions within the pro-life movement. I would simply like the law to reflect what the Declaration of Independence already proclaims, and protect this “unalienable” right to life.

Pro-lifers are merely pro-fetus or pro-birth:

It has been asked of pro-lifers what they are willing to do for children once they are born. If a sufficient answer is not to be had, then pro-lifers are accused of not really caring for people after they are born. Well, I could throw an insult right back and call people out for not caring about people before they are born by subjecting them to the torturous death that is an abortion procedure. Many crisis pregnancy centers do offer care for women and their children after the child is born, up to a certain age, and will be glad to remain in contact. But I will not make up an answer about how pro-lifers have helped people who are already born. That is because everyone has different ways in how they help people. They also have different callings in life.

Pro-lifers want to judge women for their choices:

Are there pro-lifers who will call women murderers and fault and shame them for facing a pregnancy out-of-wedlock or for having an abortion? Sadly, yes. But they certainly do not represent all of the pro-life movement. It does nothing to help a woman or her unborn child by being judgmental and in ways that are not compassionate. Many pro-lifers just want to help women facing an unplanned pregnancy, or help them recover from the pain of being post-abortive. And that’s why you see resources such as crisis pregnancy centers and Silent No More along with Project Rachel more so from pro-lifers rather than signs of condemnation.

Making assumptions about those who disagree with you does tend to make you look like you have the upper hand in the argument, especially when such assumptions can be proved wrong. These examples, while many, are likely just a select few of assumptions that have been made about pro-lifers. If you have heard of or experienced other assumptions, from any side of the issue, please feel free to share!

  • bridget

    Wow. I have been an atheist for a really long part of my life (I no longer am an atheist). However, I always knew that a fetus was a baby because science proved it. And so called feminists don’t know what feminism means, or at least what it meant. The feminist movement was formed so women weren’t treated as property, not as if they have a choice to kill her child.

    • Basset_Hound

      In fact, the early suffragettes, such as Alice Paul, Susan B. Anthony, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton all recognized abortion as the ultimate exploitation of women. Stanton once wrote..”
      “When we consider that women are treated as property it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit.”

  • http://twitter.com/MarauderTheSN Marauder

    The whole thing with “pro-lifers want to tell women what to do with their bodies” is ridiculous because what’s the one thing that pro-lifers unanimously don’t want women to do? Get abortions. We’re not objecting to women who want to get piercings, tattoos, breast implants, liposuction, transgender surgery, tubal ligations, haircuts, et cetera. When it comes to birth control, not even Rick Santorum was in favor of making it illegal. Various pro-lifers may have various objections to other things women want to do with their bodies, but thinking something is a bad idea isn’t the same as wanting to make something illegal.

    Also, if an organism has different DNA than you do, it’s not your body.

    • Chaoticblu

      You make good points in your whole post, but that last sentence was brilliant.Simple, straightforward, and true. It should be a bumper sticker.

    • Charlotte

      It’s inside of a woman’s body, so it clearly is part of their body. And of course saying that women shouldn’t be able to have abortions is telling women what to do with their own bodies. What ever happened to a woman’s right to privacy?

      • Mary Lee

        No, it is a separate person. The placenta keeps them separate. If you park your car in my garage, does it make it part of my garage, and therefore MY car? Your argument is not based in science at all, it’s based on convenience and is another excuse. All pro-abortion “arguments” are excuses.

        • Scott Z

          “All pro-abortion “arguments” are excuses.” Did you not agree abortion is acceptable in the (very) rare cases when it’s necessary to save the life of the mother?

          • Basset_Hound

            If a mother becomes so gravely ill during a pregnancy that both lives will be lost if no intervention takes place, the life that can be saved should be saved. In this case, the intention is to save the life of the mother, not to terminate the life of the child.

      • Basset_Hound

        I’m glad you don’t think anyone has a right to tell me what I can do with my body. I’ll just go down the street to the Blue Goose Cantina, have a couple of their bathtub size (and potent) Margaritas. We can drink a toast to Privacy. Then I’ll drive home. Wanna come?

      • Rebecca Downs

        A woman’s right to privacy does not give her the right to have somebody murder a living being inside of her.

  • Lauren

    I will argue that you contradict yourself in “Pro-lifers are really just anti-choice.”
    You
    condemn pro-choicers for voicing that their opposition is “anti-choice”
    yet one paragraph above, you refer to pro-choice proponents as “pro-abortion” to hammer home
    the point that these people support the right to choose abortion. How is that not the same thing? It is all a
    matter of language and trying to demonize the other side. I think by
    this point, 40 years after Roe vs. Wade, the accepted terms are
    “pro-choice” and “pro-life.”

    • Hostem Rei Publicae

      Those terms are just euphemisms and completely ignore what the discussion is about.

    • Rebecca Downs

      Actually, 40 years later, the pro-choice term is hardly accepted. Planned Parenthood themselves has dropped labels, and sadly it is rare for pro-choice/pro-abortion groups to show such common courtesy to pro-lifers as to call them by such a term.

      And if I may, I do think that I used the right term when describing the Democratic party platform as pro-abortion. When you call for abortions being safe and legal and drop rare, and advocate for tax-payer funded abortion (how else are abortion to be paid for if the woman herself can not pay), then you are pro-abortion, rather than just merely pro-choice.

    • marie27

      “Pro-abortion”
      is true, as is “anti-abortion”. “anti-choice” however is
      just ridiculous,becuase everyone is anti-choice about somethings – murder
      robbery, rape etc.

      Thy shouldn’t have a
      problem with being called pro-abortion, since they think abortion is fine, so
      how is that demoizing them?

      “Pro-abortion”
      is true, as is “anti-abortion”. “anti-choice” however is
      just ridiculous,becuase everyone is anti-choice about somethings – murder
      robbery, rape etc.

      Thy shouldn’t have a
      problem with being called pro-abortion, since they think abortion is fine, so
      how is that demoizing them?

      • Rebecca Downs

        Yup, I agree. When you call yourself pro-choice, the “choice” you are advocating for is abortion. You are either for abortion or against it. Thus, there should be no issue with the term pro-abortion if you are okay with people having the choice to get an abortion.

        But calling someone anti-choice is very much different, because that is more so meant to be demonizing.

        • Charlotte

          Using the term ‘pro-abortion’ is misleading though, as it suggests that abortion is always deemed to be the right course of action.

          The term ‘pro-choice’ is simply recognising that women have a constitutional right to privacy, and to decide (ie: choose) what happens to their own bodies, regardless of whether they decide to abort the foetus or have a baby.

          In that sense, ‘pro-life’ activists are ‘anti-choice'; they are arguing that women should not have a choice over what happens to their own body.

          • Mary Lee

            First of all the act of “choice” needs an object, something to be chosen. You cannot simply be pro-choice, that doesn’t make any sense. And pro-lifers are not anti-choice, because we are not against all choices. That is why I have no problem with the term “anti-abortion.” It is accurate, just as abolitionists could be considered “anti-slavery.”

            Pro-abortion is accurate, because what all abortion advocates believe should be chosen IS abortion. There is some lip-service given to “all choices” but that’s just hot air. Abortion advocates call women incubators, use dehumanizing language to validate the decision to kill one’s child. If you are for the choice of abortion, then you are pro-abortion. It’s all obfuscation and semantics. If it was REALLY all choices that are supported, then abortion advocates would work closely with PCPs and adoption centers. Instead, it is abortion that is being defended and supported and championed. The other choices are just a ruse to your argument.

            Now, if abortion is truly a right, and there is nothing wrong with it, then why WOULDN’T you want to be called pro-abortion? Why do abortion advocates try to distance themselves from the word “abortion”….? Why all the obfuscation and manipulation?

          • Mary Lee

            Whoops, I meant CPCs…..I need some lunch.

          • Scott Z

            I posted the following as a response to a comment in the thread about the article “Why Kermit Gosnell should be acquitted”:

            “If you believe that abortion is a right, then you are pro-abortion.” In general, merely being unwilling to support making X illegal, does not make one pro-X. It may in the case of abortion, however.

            The fact people who call themselves pro-choice don’t like being called pro-abortion is a GOOD thing. It means you actually have a chance of convincing them your position is the right one.

            If a zygote really is a person, then every women who’s ever had an abortion is an accomplice or accessory to murder. However, most people who call themselves pro-life are not calling for these women to be put on trial. (For which I’m quite glad.) Do you know why?

            I am posting it again because I think it works as a response here, too.

          • Basset_Hound

            Prior to Roe, the abortionists were the ones put on trial because they were the ones actually delivering the “services”. Women were seen as being driven by desperation into seeking out the “services”.

          • Scott Z

            “Women were seen as being driven by desperation into seeking out the “services”.” While I’m quite sure that’s correct, were they not still involved in the crime?

          • Rebecca Downs

            Mary Lee as well as Scott Z basically said what I was going to. Good responses guys! And thanks for posting this again here too, Scott! :)

          • Julia

            “If a zygote really is a person, then every women who’s ever had an abortion is an accomplice or accessory to murder. However, most people who call themselves pro-life are not calling for these women to be put on trial. (For which I’m quite glad.) Do you know why?”

            For one thing, abortion does not kill zygotes but embryos and fetuses with beating hearts, arms, legs, etc. (though this is really irrelavent.

            Secondly, basic constitutional law – you can’t be charged and imprisoned for something that was legal when you did it.

          • Jordan

            I think ‘pro-abortion-rights’ and ‘anti-abortion-rights’ work better. ‘Pro-choicers’ believe that one should have the right to have an abortion should she desire one and ‘pro-lifers’ believe that abortion is not a right.

            On the same level, though, pro-choicers are ‘anti-life;’ they are are arguing that unborn children should not get to live if their mothers do not want them too.

          • Rebecca Downs

            I would not say that people who are pro-choice, pro-abortion, however you want to term it are anti-life. I would never call someone that; I don’t think it’s true. But I do think it is almost the equivalent of calling a pro-lifer anti-choice… not saying that you’d argue with that point, just something I thought I’d point out.

  • Hostem Rei Publicae

    Great article, but anyone who has an abortion is a murderer, unless its forced. Ignoring that is just pandering to the other side. To reiterate about what you said about Republicans, although the platform may claim to be pro-life, its obvious that most “elected” Republicans in the federal government are pro-abortion.

    • Rebecca Downs

      Thank you! And thank you for stating your point kindly and respectfully. I believe it is actually the abortionist who is the murderer, though. While the woman may consent to a horrible act, which is actually a murder, I do believe it is because she is confused or vulnerable and likely in a very bad spot where she feels that she has no other choice. That does not make the abortion okay, but I do think we should pity and be understanding of these women, rather than call them murderers, even if they are involving themselves in the murderous act that is abortion.

      And regarding Republicans, yes, they could of course be more pro-life, but I do believe still that there are genuinely good Republicans with good intentions, who do want to pass pro-life laws. Sen. Marco Rubio and Rep. Paul Ryan come to mind first, and there are many others.

      • Hostem Rei Publicae

        Thank you for your response. I agree Rubio and Ryan are good on the abortion issue, although their pro-war stances concern me. Ryan also losses credit for running with Romney, who has a pro-abortion record. I would mention Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, and I’m sure there are more, but overall there seems too be no initiative from the Republican Caucus to introduce pro-life legislation and Republican presidents have nominated many pro-abortion justices. Any presidential primary candidates who are firmly pro-life are destroyed by the party establishment.

        • Rebecca Downs

          I heard Ted Cruz speak at CPAC, and the more I read and hear about him, the more I just love him! I would love him to be a candidate in 2016 or maybe the next GOP presidential candidate after that. Rand Paul is awesome too, we share the same birthday! :) And I can’t disagree with you, though I do have a little more hope, perhaps sometimes more hope than I should have… but I am also driven to get involved into politics to make the party more pro-life.

      • Chaoticblu

        I respect your response to Hostem Rebecca. And thank you for acknowledging that these woman are participating in a “murderous act”. It’s great you can have such compassion for them while some of us struggle with our anger..I’m sure it took time to have such compassion and maybe I will one day soon be able to focus less on the anger and more on supporting woman in their time of need , as well as fight for the unborn.I wish pro choicers spoke kindly like you do. That’s also where the anger comes from, the hatred many seem to have for us, all for wanting to protect children.

        • Rebecca Downs

          Oh don’t worry at all! I used to struggle as well, and still do sometimes. None of us are perfect. Please know that when I say this I am not criticizing anyone or calling anyone out, especially when we all struggle with something, but my point in making it is that let’s not give the other side something to call us out on.

          • Chaoticblu

            Yeah I get what you mean, don’t give the other side any ammo. I know you are just pointing out the things pro choicers criticize us for and what makes them even more not want to listen to us. It’s hard to be peaceful when they judge us too..or the majority seems too. But I’m going to try and work on it, and I hope they do. too.

    • Chaoticblu

      I agree with Hostem, we don’t need to sugar coat if we”re going to discuss abortion frankly. While some females, most likely younger girls may be confused and not fully understand the process of abortion or that their fetus is alive, there are plenty of woman who fully understand what they are doing and that murder by definition is the killing of another human being. While I welcome anybody , even post abortive woman into the pro life movement, I simply wish many would stop trying to make excuses for what they did and own up to the fact that they did indeed “murder” their child, by the definition of the word which to my understanding is the willful killing of another human being. I’m not saying we need to constantly use the word, termination would be fine, but just have some integrity and own up to what you did. I’m sorry if I sound hostile, while I do struggle to have compassion for post abortive woman at times, this really bothers me and doesn’t help me to be compassionate when many truly don’t want to own up to their mistakes it seems, yet seek forgiveness.

    • http://www.facebook.com/monica.thompson1013 Monica Thompson

      I don’t blame the women who get abortions as much as I blame our society and the abortion industry for effectively spreading the lies that ending a life is a legitimate, even reasonable, option when facing an unwanted pregnancy, and that people should be able to have as much sex as they want with whoever they want and not have to face the consequences.

      • Citizen Ruth

        I hadn’t had sex in a year and had only been with one partner when I got pregnant. Not all women who have unplanned pregnancies are whores.

        • Basset_Hound

          No, they’re just women who can either face responsibility for a choice they willingly made or try to extricate themselves from the consequences of their choices by killing an innocent life.

        • http://www.facebook.com/monica.thompson1013 Monica Thompson

          I never called anyone a whore. Where is the word “whore” in my post? All I said was that actions have consequences, and ending a life to escape facing responsibility for your own actions is selfish and immoral.

    • Citizen Ruth

      I am a proud murderer then. I got pregnant while in a drug study. My choice was to have a baby with possibly horrific birth defects or an abortion at 5 weeks. I asked to see the ultrasound of the “fetus” when I had the abortion. They couldn’t even find the embryo at first because it was so small. It was a clump of cells. Not a viable living person.

      • Calvin Freiburger

        Here’s some information about your dead son or daughter: http://www.baby2see.com/development/week5.html

        It is a simple biological fact that he or she was a live human being even at 5 weeks. So why does his or her “viability” make a difference?

        • Citizen Ruth

          Looks like it’s still in tadpole stage of development. It’s obviously not a he or she. That has not developed into a human yet. Sorry. I stand by decision to “murder” my unborn fetus rather than it be born with all sorts of health problems and possible birth defects. Also, I had signed a contract when I started the drug study that if I did get pregnant (and yes I was using birth control at the time) I would abort. Who are you to pass judgement on me when you nothing about me or the circumstances of my life at the time?

          • Calvin Freiburger

            Wow, Ruth. You’re basing your rationalization entirely around a lazy and superficial understanding of how it looks to you, rather than making an effort to understand what the relevant science actually is. For one thing, you seem not to know that sex is determined at the time of conception (http://www.pennmedicine.org/encyclopedia/em_DisplayAnimation.aspx?gcid=000110&ptid=17) meaning that yes, your child WAS ALREADY “a he or she.” For another, zygotes and embryos don’t “develop into a human”; they ALREADY ARE human beings. That’s what “human being” means: an organism who’s a member of the species Homo sapiens. Here’s a good starting point for curing your ignorance: http://www.abort73.com/abortion/medical_testimony/

          • Scott Z

            “That’s what “human being” means: an organism who’s a member of the species Homo sapiens.” But, if all human beings are people, then the zygote I came from was a person before I began to exist. Furthermore, assuming it makes sense to refer to a person as ‘who’, then… Who was that zygote before it gave rise to me?

          • Calvin Freiburger

            He was you. You were that zygote. Zygote, embryo, fetus, and infant are all terms denoting different developmental stages of the same being.

          • Scott Z

            Those statements can only be true if a person’s brain is not the sole source of his or her mind/consciousness.

          • Calvin Freiburger

            First, it’s not a matter of opinion, biologically speaking. They’re all terms for different developmental stages of a single organism. I can’t understand why this is still a point of contention – you could theoretically argue that a human being who lacks consciousness lacks worth or significance (though I’d argue against it), but you really can’t argue that it isn’t a human being. Consciousness is a quality we possess, not the other way around.

            Second, it’s true that I believe in the soul, meaning I don’t believe our identity/worth/spirit/etc. is exclusively tied to our brain alone. However, even if we put that aside, consider this: after fertilization, nothing else is added to that zygote to fundamentally alter its composition. Its growth and development are directed from within, and even while it lacks a brain or thoughts, it already possesses that which will unfold into consciousness. Isn’t that alone enough to indicate that the “I was nothing before my brain” position is a major oversimplification?

          • Scott Z

            Well, if all “human organisms” are “human beings”, then I find it quite inaccurate to say all “human beings” are people.

            “Isn’t that alone enough to indicate that the “I was nothing before my brain” position is a major oversimplification?” I do not think that is enough, no. However, since it quite possibly should be enough, I will think about it some more and get back to you.

          • Scott Z

            I have thought about it more, and, unless it’s possible for my mind to survive the death of my brain, I don’t see how I could have existed before my brain existed.

          • Chaoticblu

            Heh as Calvin said, the Zygote WAS you..in that stage of development. Human beings just don’t suddenly appear! :) I’ll admit it can be tricky to talk about sometimes as biology can be weird. We go from single celled organisms to multi celled – fully developed human beings! Not just that, but cells can be divided into atoms, atoms that have little spaces between then. Yet, we seem solid. Our world is just crazy yet awesome.

        • Citizen Ruth

          You are 5 weeks pregnant. (about three weeks from conception)
          The amniotic fluid is being built up.
          The embryo grows from a tiny speck about 2mm – the size of a pin head.
          By the end of the week the embryo will have more than doubled in size to about 4-5mm.
          The
          egg has now completely grown into the mucous membrane of the uterus
          which covers the egg, the umbilical sac and the amniotic fluid cavity.
          A fibrin clot closes the hole to the uterus cavity.
          The placenta is developing.
          The embryo starts receiving oxygen and nutrition through the placenta.The
          cells making up the ovum are beginning to differentiate and specialize
          in areas of development. Some cells will make up the embryo; others the
          amniotic sac and placenta etc. The ovum, which has been floating around
          in your uterus, has now implanted into the wall of the uterus. Now comes
          an exciting time of rapid growth! The amniotic sac, amniotic cavity and
          yolk sac are developing. The placenta is beginning to form now too.

          Implantation
          – Some spotting (also known as implantation bleeding) may occur about
          10 – 14 days after conception. You may believe you are starting your
          period but generally this spotting (bleeding) is extremely light and
          lasts only a day or so.

          “At week five, you might begin to
          suspect you’re pregnant since the embryo produces hormones which stop
          the mother’s menstrual cycle. The fertilized egg, now called a
          blastocyst, is a fluid-filled cluster of about 500 cells, still
          multiplying madly. It is attached to the uterus wall and divides into
          two parts. The half attached to the uterine wall becomes the placenta,
          the vessel-filled support system that nourishes the developing life, and
          the other half will become the baby.

          At
          the end of week five; nerve growth begins when a sheet of cells on the
          back of the embryo folds in the middle to form a tube, which will become
          the future spinal cord. At one end tube enlarges to form the brain’s
          major sections. The amniotic fluid that cushions the embryo begins to
          form. Between the forth and fifth week the embryo more than doubles in
          size to about, 4-5mm about a 1/8 inch in size.”

          That’s not even a fetus yet, and certainly not a he or she. Are you serious? That just makes me feel even better about my decision. At least I was responsible enough to have my abortion as early as possible. (In fact I had to wait to have my abortion because they wouldn’t even do medical abortions until 5 weeks.) I could have sat around and waited till it was a fetus.

      • Rebecca Downs

        Sometimes I don’t think it’s worth it to discuss the issue with such angry people. It’s just going to make us all frustrated, flustered and/or upset. To say you are “a proud murderer then” is likely just shoving it in our faces that you are pro-choice and/or post-abortive. It also likely you’re angry because you’re hurting deep down inside. We can pray for you and I know I and many others would be happy to talk to you about post-abortive healing, but I am not really thrilled about dealing with such blatant lies, about “not a viable living person” when the truth is on our side and yet pro-choice persons keep talking to us and like we’re some anti-science lying freaks.

        • Scott Z

          Well, unless I believed in some sort of ‘soul’, I would find it quite inaccurate to label an embryo with no brain as a “person”.

          • Rebecca Downs

            Oh, I actually wasn’t talking about/to you, Scott. While I’m not sure if I agree with you on all/anything that you have said, I find your points and arguments to be fascinating and interesting, and that you have been at least civil.

            That’s your own belief that there are no souls, and it’s your own belief to hold whatever view you hold on abortion. But since science says that life begins at conception, I say that abortion is the taking of an innocent human person’s life, and that nobody should be able to make that choice. But if we disagree, I think we can do so respectfully?

          • Scott Z

            “But since science says that life begins at conception” Yes, I believe it is accurate to label embryos and zygotes as new, distinct “human organisms”. However, as far as I know, there are no scientific fields that state souls are real, or that a person’s mind/consciousness can exist without his or her brain. This is why I think it is inaccurate to call embryos and zygotes “people”.

      • Chaoticblu

        I would give you credit for believing you were doing the right thing since your baby might have been born with what I’m assuming would have been potentially lethal birth defects, but I’m sensing a lack of compassion from your other posts. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

        What you need to understand though is, your embryo was imbedded in your uterine lining, which means unless something by nature went wrong , that embryo would have continued to grow. Grown and started to look like the human being they were.

        I believe you’re sarcastic (from what I got) use of the word fetus, is somewhat correct. In that the embryo was not in the fetal stage yet. But whose to know for sure now if they would have got there or not? I understand you were told there was the possibility of birth defects, and as I said maybe even lethal ones. But-and I’m sharing my opinion as you shared yours and others have , I know it won’t matter to you probably but maybe it’ll shed light to others on where some of us are coming from-
        I still have to disagree with your course of action.

        I believe every child deserves a chance and I personally would carry my child to term , birth defects in all. If they were lethal birth defects, I would still carry and make them as comfortable as possible because I believe they have a right to see the outside world, to be born into it and see their parents. Even if it’s just for a few moments. Then, i would put my child to rest when the time came. Their grave stone would have their NAME and dob-dod on it. I would give them that right, the right to experience life as well as the right to a proper burial. I just feel, people deserve that much, good people anyways.

        But not everyone feels that way, and I guess it’s just a personal moral thing, but then again being Pro Life is all about morality and human rights. You are not pro life and that is your position. It seems you don’t believe in everyone’s human right to life either, which is sad. But your choice. I hope I could shed some light on your inaccurate statements about your embryo not being a viable human though. And I will give you credit for taking responsibility and acknowledging what you did was end the life of your child.

        One last thing, you REALLY need to do some research on biology. I don’t know how much clearer anyone can be , as Calvin gave you links- but the sex of your child is determined at CONCEPTION. XX and XY..when sperm and egg combine there is a 50/50 chance of XY(Boy) or XX (Girl) This means: While WE can’t tell what gender they are right away, they already know and their body will develop based on that determined fact. DNA are like blueprints. It is embedded into you. The embryo develops based on that DNA. Just because they don’t look like a “baby’ yet doesn’t mean they aren’t one , and a gender specific one at that!

        Honestly you’re argument about the embryo not being a fetus yet to rationalize your pro choice stance just doesn’t seem valid to me. You need to explain how not being a fetus yet makes the embryo have less a right to life than a fetus, or a premature infant for that matter. Technically, we are all clumps of cells. ;) Could you explain how that ‘not fetus” is not a member of the human species? Or does that not matter to you? Are you saying for you , being a fetus is what’s important? If so, are you for or against the option of aborting fetuses? Or is that where you draw the line? Or is it solely about weather the developing baby has a birth defect or not? I just really wish you’d explain yourself better and more thoroughly then just saying “it’s not a fetus”.

  • http://www.facebook.com/monica.thompson1013 Monica Thompson

    Politically I’m a libertarian, and I’m pro-life. I believe the unborn have the same rights and deserve the same liberties as the rest of us.

  • Demi

    There is also an incorrect belief that people with pro life views do not believe in helping those who are less fortunate. One particular post I saw on facebook with a picture of a little girl in a hospital bed said, “Please don’t call yourself pro life, you’d just as soon let me die if my parent’s couldn’t afford medical insurance”. I suppose because many pro life people consider themselves Republican and their party is not known for supporting welfare and other similar programs. So there is an assumption that once the baby is born, pro life people don’t care about it. However, people of great conscience such as former president Jimmy Carter consider themselves pro life and also fight for social justice every day. That’s a true humanitarian.

    • Basset_Hound

      Actually if you look at the statistics, conservatives are far more generous in giving to charities. Many churches also have many programs to reach out and help those who are less fortunate. As for “not supporting welfare and other social programs”….what is wrong with advocating the idea that people should make more responsible choices in their personal lives rather than looking to the government as a security blanket. For example, if a person delays their first sexual encounter until their 20’s they will have a chance to complete their educations, and become involved in stable relationships that lead to marriage. If people delay childbearing until they are married, they are far less likely to remain in poverty. True humanitarinism involves encouraging people to become self-sufficient.

    • Basset_Hound

      Actually if you look at the statistics, conservatives are far more generous in giving to charities. Many churches also have many programs to reach out and help those who are less fortunate. As for “not supporting welfare and other social programs”….what is wrong with advocating the idea that people should make more responsible choices in their personal lives rather than looking to the government as a security blanket. For example, if a person delays their first sexual encounter until their 20’s they will have a chance to complete their educations, and become involved in stable relationships that lead to marriage. If people delay childbearing until they are married, they are far less likely to remain in poverty. True humanitarinism involves encouraging people to become self-sufficient.

  • Anon

    Wow, what is this garbage? Its not about women’s rights at all. Its about human life and existence. Abortion would mean nothing to a person with no moral code. None at all. But to those who do live by a moral code, realize that murder is not good. Simple. If I can pay somebody to rip my baby apart inside of me, then why not go shoot people, steal money, use illegal substances. Why not right?

    This common outright purposeful stupidity among the general public is sickening. The moment anything controversial comes up everyone has a common answer, “Im not holding you back, its your rights.” All of these women hear “abortion” and they immediately start yelling “Muh rights!”

    If you are in the slightest intelligent, you should read up on abortion from a non-biased source. You will be deeply sickened. Read about were the idea of planned parenthood started (Margaret Sanger). Read about how the fetus screams as it is ripped apart.

    Why take my word? Dont. Learn for yourself as I did. I also learned that two of my brothers died before we could even talk. They were killed in the womb. Killed not by the abortion doctor, but by human sin.

    Get the facts, cast away the bullsh*t, and learn. Get a moral code, and be sensible.

  • Rachael

    I for one am a bit more sexually active then I should be, and I own up to that. But with that said I ALWAYS tell my partners straight up that I will take all the precautions necessary and I expect him to do the same, but if I should get pregnant, I am very pro-life and nothing he can say or do would get me to take plan B or have an abortion. I have lost potential partners over that stance, but many others respect me for that.

    I tell all my partners that I made my choice when the clothes came off. I have done everything possible to protect myself from disease and pregnancy. After the fact though, if pregnancy should arise, it’s not the child’s fault that I made a mistake, and I will work my hardest to give that child the best possible life.

    • Basset_Hound

      I don’t agree with your choice to be sexually active outside of marriage, but I’ve got a TREMENDOUS amount of respect for the fact that you will not make a child pay with his life if your contraception fails. If you’ve lost partners over this, then you’ve done yourself a favor. They weren’t worth your time.

    • Rebecca Downs

      Thank you, Rachael for sharing your story! Your situation is a bit similar to mine. I haven’t had sex with anyone but my current boyfriend for over a year and a half (since we started dating), but our relationship hit a critical point when we did have to discuss what would have happened if I was pregnant. I thank God for the courage I had to be calm, let him say his piece, and then talk to him about it after for real. But I say kudos to you, and while we both know our being sexually active is a fault of ours, at least we can show others that you can be pro-life and sexually active.

  • Citizen Ruth

    Are you for the death penalty?

    • Calvin Freiburger
    • Hostem Rei Publicae

      Absolutely, everyone of you sickos should be facing it.

      • Scott Z

        I should be killed because I say I’m willing to support abortion during the first 21 days after conception? Despite the fact I’ve never had an abortion, performed an abortion, or persuaded anyone to get an abortion? I seriously hope you’re joking…

        • Hostem Rei Publicae

          No, I was speaking to someone who had gotten an abortion.

          • Scott Z

            You think Citizen Ruth deserves the death penalty for being involved in the killing of a 5-week-old embryo?

          • Hostem Rei Publicae

            Like I said, absolutely.

          • Scott Z

            Fascinating. Would you mind if I quoted you on that? For example: “Username Hostem Rei Publicae thinks all women who have had abortions that were not forced or done to save their own lives deserve the death penalty.”

          • Hostem Rei Publicae

            Sure

          • Scott Z

            Okay, thanks.

          • Scott Z

            *sigh* I did not expect you to actually agree to that…

            Do you realize there are women who deeply regret their abortions and are strong supporters of the pro-life movement? What good do you think killing them will accomplish?

          • Hostem Rei Publicae

            The same argument can be made for any heinous crime. It’s no reason not to demand justice for the victims. Naturally the decision would ultimately be in the hands of the jury and judge as in any death penalty case. Remorse can be considered in sentencing. A precedence must be set that these murders of innocent children are not acceptable and will absolutely not be tolerated or treated with leniency.

          • Scott Z

            “The same argument can be made for any heinous crime. It’s no reason not to demand justice for the victims.” A murderer who sincerely regrets his or her actions and works to prevent other murders is about the closest you can get to true justice for the victim(s).

            “A precedent must be set that these murders of innocent children are not acceptable and will absolutely not be tolerated or treated with leniency.” Yes, I believe that’s how murders in general are treated. Am I correct in assuming you believe zygotes are people?

          • Hostem Rei Publicae

            Yes

        • Julia

          abortions aren’t perpetrated in the first 21 days after conception.

  • Citizen Ruth

    Just because you outlaw something doesn’t mean it will go away. If abortion was outlawed it would just go back to dirty backroom butchers and women trying to abort themselves with crochet hooks? Is that what you “feminist pro-lifers” want for your fellow women? Women dying from unsafe abortions?

    • Calvin Freiburger
      • Citizen Ruth

        It still won’t end abortion. Abortion will always exist.

        • Basset_Hound

          So why don’t we just throw in the towel and repeal laws against murder, armed robbery, and DUI, since by your “logic” they’ve always existed and they’re never going away?

        • Calvin Freiburger

          So will murder, rape, theft, child abuse, littering, arson, vandalism, drunk driving, fraud, libel, and all sorts of other crimes. No law will ever “end” them. What’s your point?

  • Amy

    One man my mom and I met at a 40 Days for Life event refused to believe that we don’t condone abortion clinic bombers. He also called us fascists (no, I’m actually serious about that), anti-American, and he called my mom schizophrenic (she’s not, in case anyone was wondering). He also had a huge problem with the fact that we, as Christians, do vote based on our worldview and morals. He must have forgotten that he votes based on his morals and worldview just as much as we do…

    But yeah. Having someone assume I condone murder simply because it would slow down an abortion clinic or something was sad. This guy had no idea that we believe pro-life extends to all people, born and unborn.

    • Basset_Hound

      Ironic, since various “politically correct” groups have been far more likely to engage in property damage than the pro-life movement.

  • Pingback: On defying a pro-life assumption | Live Action News