5 Myths About Pro-Lifers, And How To Refute Them

There are a lot of negative stereotypes about the pro-life movement. I could easily write a list of 20 or more. These five, though, are the ones I personally encounter most often, and in the most capital letters. You’ll probably find them familiar. If you don’t know how to argue against these, you should.

5. We’re all brainwashed.

Since they can’t seem to wrap their brains around how a person might make an intelligent, informed decision to oppose abortion, anti-lifers sometimes like to assume we have all been duped. I have been accused, via Facebook, Twitter, email, and comment, of having been brainwashed by the following people or organizations: the Republican Party, Christians, the Vatican, white men, television, the conservative media, Sarah Palin, and the devil. I am not making any of those up.

Okay, I admit it. The devil made me pro-life.

While I suppose there are those who were raised inside Vatican walls and never heard a dissenting opinion, the truth is that even kids brought up in homes with pro-life parents were probably exposed to pro-abortion ideology somewhere along the way. It may have even happened without their knowledge.

Let me give you an example: I loved the movie Dirty Dancing as a kid. I wasn’t allowed to watch it, but I managed to watch it almost constantly, starting at around age ten. A major plot line in that movie is a main character having an abortion. Everyone is super casual about it, although they never use the word “abortion.” The girl ends up getting hurt by the procedure, but the impression is that this is because the woman had to go to an unsafe doctor with “a dirty knife and a folding table.” Then a real doctor is called and the girl is okay and everyone dances some more. The impression I got as a kid was that abortion was a tragic and sexy thing that pretty girls sometimes had to get because they were so desirable and awesome.

I don’t remember hearing anything about abortion from my church or my mom or my friends. I only heard about it from TV and movies, and it was always portrayed in the same light: a sad but necessary thing that boyfriends should pay for while wearing sheepish expressions. I ended up pro-choice until age 27, when I made a decision, based on little or no Chinese water torture by any Popes or Palins, that abortion was wrong and must be ended.

The best way to combat this stereotype is to share your own story. Let anti-lifers know the sound, rational, scientific and ethical reasons on which you base your pro-life activism. And don’t let your kids watch Dirty Dancing.

Sorry, Patrick.

4. We’re violent.

This is my least favorite myth because it’s the least true. The pro-life movement is by definition an outcry against a violent act.

Eight people have been killed in the United States by anti-abortion protesters. Last I heard, they had all been caught and punished. Fifty million babies have been killed — legally — by abortionists since 1973. Yet we’re the side that gets called violent. Fifty million to eight… Those are pretty dramatic numbers. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say it’s safer to be an abortionist than an unborn baby. Somebody somewhere is probably going to quote that in outrage, never mind the fact that is statistically 100% true.

The pro-life movement as a whole continuously and widely condemns acts of violence, yet anyone who professes a pro-life viewpoint is subject to being called a “clinic bomber.” Eight people — out of hundreds of millions — do not represent the movement, especially when their actions have been decried countless times.

If someone accuses you of belonging to a violent movement, remind them that since Roe v. Wade, every year an average of 1.2 million unborn children have been killed in the U.S., versus an average of two-tenths of an abortionist. The numbers don’t lie.

3. We’re all religious, conservative, and old.

There’s nothing wrong with being religious, conservative, or old, but it’s a mischaracterization. I am a conservative Catholic in my early 30s now, but when I became pro-life, I was a liberal agnostic in my 20s. While many — probably most — pro-lifers believe in some sort of deity, or at least in the human soul, not all of them do. The arguments that made me pro-life were grounded in science, ethics, and human rights. They had nothing to do with religion.

The friend who changed my mind knew better than to use a religious argument with me; I would have stopped listening. I was already wary because she was Catholic. I guess I thought she would sprinkle holy water on me while I wasn’t looking. But she didn’t. She just answered my questions — I had a lot of them — and by the end of the conversation I was, quite against my will, pro-life. I have remained so ever since.

I was also not a conservative, and many — including the friend I mentioned — remain pro-life and liberal or Democrat. The atheist, liberal New Yorker writer Nat Hentoff, after “coming out” as pro-life, experienced a backlash of negativity from fellow writers, intellectuals, atheists, Jews, and Democrats, but he stayed pro-life and a “civil libertarian” for the rest of his career.

A lot of people, when they think of pro-life activists, think of little old ladies saying the rosary outside a clinic. God bless those little old ladies and the work they do, but the truth is the pro-life movement is becoming a youth movement. Despite the fact that society in general seems to get more secular and less conservative, more and more young people oppose abortion. There is no consensus as to why, but it may have something to do with advancing science and technology. We know far more about the unborn human today than we did when Roe v. Wade was decided.

The "products of conception."

If someone tells you all pro-lifers are middle-aged white Christian Republicans, tell them they’re wrong — even if you are a middle-aged white Christian Republican. I have known pro-lifers of every age, color, religion, and political persuasion. If you don’t, try to get to know some. They’re everywhere! Check out Secular Pro-Life, Pagans for Life, or Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League. They may have a perspective you haven’t considered, which will help build your arsenal of pro-life knowledge and arguments, and make your parties more interesting.

2. We’re hypocrites if we oppose abortion but don’t oppose (fill in the blank).

Can you be pro-life and pro-death penalty? Yes. Can you be pro-life and support the war in Iraq? Yes. Can you be pro-life and eat meat? Yes.

You can’t compare these things to abortion. You can’t compare anything to abortion, except certain instances of euthanasia, which by the way are also covered under the pro-life umbrella.

Abortion is child murder. It’s the intentional killing of an innocent human being. And when I say “innocent,” I mean it in the most literal sense. I don’t mean “innocent” of murder, shoplifting, or appearing on “Jersey Shore,” though all of these are undeniably bad things. I mean completely innocent. The unborn child has never harmed a living soul. He did not cause his own existence. He did not ask to be conceived. He is brought to life and, in an abortion, he is killed, most often for the same reason he was conceived: because his mother made a choice.

No act compares to abortion in its heinousness. So don’t let anyone tell you that you must oppose the death penalty, or war, or meat if you are pro-life. Explain the difference between incidental death and intentional. Explain to them the difference between a cow and a human. Explain to them the difference between a convicted criminal and an unborn baby.

1. We have an ulterior motive.

This is the most common argument you will hear, and it honestly doesn’t even deserve the term “argument.” It is a non-argument. An argument would be, “Abortion is okay because the fetus isn’t human,” or “Abortion is okay because the unborn deserve no rights.” Those are arguments. They’re wrong, but they’re arguments. Instead, I am often accused of pretending to be against abortion when what I really want to do is one of the following:

Take all human rights away from women.

Stop everyone from having sex.

Encourage child abuse.

Make promiscuous girls feel bad about themselves.

And so on. So instead of saying, “Abortion should be legal because….,” the presenter of this “argument” says, “Well, you just want to enforce your Puritanical sexual values.” Or, “You just want people to have babies they can’t afford.” And so on.

Look. I’m gonna take this opportunity to come out with it: I am secretly okay with abortion. I honestly don’t mind if women go into clinics and pay doctors to suck their children out of them. What I’m really after, what I’ve really wanted all along, is to engage in “slut-shaming.”

Apparently "slut-shaming" is a real thing that people are against. This was taken at the SlutWalk Toronto.... Yeeeeah.

This is my favorite non-argument ever. Written by “freelance journalist and stand-up comic” Amanda Grimes (whose graduate thesis was on “gender and stand-up comedy”), this blog made me literally wipe tears of laughter from my eyes. So she’s got the comedy part down! According to Grimes, pro-lifers aren’t really interested in saving lives. What they secretly want to do — wait for it — is make slutty girls feel bad about themselves. You heard me. The ulterior motive behind the pro-life movement, according to Andrea Grimes, is “slut-shaming.”

Ms. Grimes, if by “slut-shaming” you mean encouraging young women to behave in ways that will result in less pain for themselves, their children, and society, it is certainly on my list of reasons for opposing abortion. However, I hate to break it to you, reason number one is that I am actually nutso enough to believe in the sanctity of every human life. Sorry to disappoint. Now get back to that groundbreaking, totally relevant thesis!

By the way, for the record, you know what changed Grimes’s mind about abortion? I’ll let her say it in her own words:

Well, I got off my religious high horse and on to a sex life I enjoyed and found fulfilling.

That is… profound, isn’t it? She went to college, lost her virginity, and found out sex was fun! So then she discarded all the morals her parents went to the trouble to teach her, and “went right the f*** out” and got on birth control, which, as it often does, led her to going right the eff out and feeling okay about abortion. “I believe wanting to take that choice away from others is deeply about shame and punishment and  judgment, and not about righteousness and love.”

Guess what, Grimes? Just because you believe something about us doesn’t make it true.

So apparently, Ms. Grimes did not believe in the sanctity of life. She was merely having fun “slut-shaming.” But just because she didn’t have strong, factual, righteous, loving reasons for opposing abortion doesn’t mean that’s the case for you, or me, or any other pro-lifer.

Don’t let anyone assign you intentions that aren’t yours. We are pro-life because we care for women and their children. We are pro-life because we believe in human rights. Don’t give an inch when it comes to your reasons for opposing abortion.


If you engage in any kind of pro-life activism you are going to encounter resistance. Not all of it will be honest, pleasant, or fair. If they haven’t yet, people are going to assume things about you and assign you traits and beliefs that don’t belong to you. (We’ll get to the name calling in another article.)

Learn to politely, rationally, tell them why they’re wrong, and bring the issue back to what it’s really about: the reprehensible act of abortion, what it truly is, and why we have to stop it.

  • Guest

    spoiler much?

  • “And don’t let your kids watch Dirty Dancing.”

    Nah, just talk to them about it.

  • MTgirl

    Kristen, I LOVE YOUR BLOGS!!

  • Sparky

    Well done Kristen – no condescension intended J

  • Lauryl Sulfate

    The term “slut shaming” refers specifically to the act of blaming rape victims for their own rape, as in, “She was asking for it! Did you see the way she was dressed?”. If you’re interested, I recommend googling “slut walk protests” to find out more. Please try not to pre-judge people before you even know what you’re talking about. Isn’t that the whole point of your article?

    • If I misunderstood it, then so did the author of the blog who introduced the term to me, and every website I looked at to find out more about what it was. Rape seemed to be the jumping-off point but the concept is certainly not limited to rape victims. I did google “slut-shaming” and “slut walks,” and what I found is a lot of people mentioning rape victims and then celebrating behavior that is actually slutty. Here is a definition of slut-shaming from FinallyFeminism101.com:

      “Slut-shaming, also known as slut-bashing, is the idea of shaming and/or attacking a woman or a girl for being sexual, having one or more sexual partners, acknowledging sexual feelings, and/or acting on sexual feelings. Furthermore, it’s “about the implication that if a woman has sex that traditional society disapproves of, she should feel guilty and inferior” (Alon Levy, Slut Shaming). It is damaging not only to the girls and women targeted, but to women in general an society as a whole. It should be noted that slut-shaming can occur even if the term “slut” itself is not used.”

      Rape is not mentioned.

    • If I misunderstood it, then so did the author of the blog who introduced the term to me, and every website I looked at to find out more about what it was. Rape seemed to be the jumping-off point but the concept is certainly not limited to rape victims. I did google “slut-shaming” and “slut walks,” and what I found is a lot of people mentioning rape victims and then celebrating behavior that is actually slutty. Here is a definition of slut-shaming from FinallyFeminism101.com:

      “Slut-shaming, also known as slut-bashing, is the idea of shaming and/or attacking a woman or a girl for being sexual, having one or more sexual partners, acknowledging sexual feelings, and/or acting on sexual feelings. Furthermore, it’s “about the implication that if a woman has sex that traditional society disapproves of, she should feel guilty and inferior” (Alon Levy, Slut Shaming). It is damaging not only to the girls and women targeted, but to women in general an society as a whole. It should be noted that slut-shaming can occur even if the term “slut” itself is not used.”

      Rape is not mentioned.

      • guest

        Which leads to men being found innocent for rape, because the woman according to the jury is asking for it.  Every intelligent person knows a rape trial the defendant isn’t on trial it’s the victim because of slut-shaming.  Since we know Republicans love rapists, sexual harassers, adulterers, etc. this will never change.

        • I have a law degree and no, victims are not on trial. Look up rape shield laws.

          Your comment about Republicans is ridiculous.

          • guest

            It isn’t supposed to but it does.  If the man says she consented to sex then it becomes her word against his.  Then she has to prove she didn’t want to have it.

            Look at all the Republican candidates running for President and Herman Cain, majority of them have at least committed adultery.

          • No, she doesn’t have to prove she didn’t want to have it. The prosecution has to prove that rape was committed, because we operate under the principle that people are innocent until proven guilty.

            Herman Cain allegedly cheated on his wife and Newt Gingrich definitely cheated on his two ex-wives. I’m not sure where you’re getting the impression that adultery is also true of Romney, Paul, Bachmann, Santorum, Huntsman, et cetera.

            The current most infamous adulterers in politics are Democrats – Clinton and Edwards come to mind – but I wouldn’t ever say that Democrats love adulterers, rapists, and sexual harassers. A lot of them do seem to like Bill Clinton, though, who holds the distinction of definitely being an adulterer and being accused of both rape and sexual harassment.

        • Yikes

          How much Amanda Marcotte have you been reading?

          • guest

            Who is Amanda Marcotte?  How much of her are you reading to know what she has to say?

          • Well, you can’t use people’s idiocy against them, if you don’t know what they are saying. *wink*

  • bubbalouwee

    Sin causes blindness.  It is very strange how people who support murder think about people who hate murder.  When will people realize the communist/socialist controlled main stream media influences thinking and human behavior?  Don’t listen to their propaganda and deprogram people with the truth.  The truth is human life begins at conception and needs to be protected.  

  • Angie Abunga

    I’m pro-life and have talked to many, many pro-lifers that say some really horrible things.  Telling women that they feel bad for their kids because their mother is pro-choice or that their child should have been aborted since they will grow up to be pro-choice or even rejoicing at a pro-choice woman who had JUST gotten released from the hospital after having a miscarriage.  If this isn’t violent behavior with ulterior motives, you tell me what is.  I can count on my fingers how many pro-lifers I’ve talked to who actually speak out in love and compassion as we should

  • Rccrawford
  • Maria Krasinski

    I love telling people i’m an out and proud…  pro-life lesbian 🙂     http://www.plagal.org

    • Isa241

      Thank you very much for the link. As a pro-life, pro-gay
      rights agnostic I’m always looking for more diverse groups like this.

    • Anonymous

      I am glad you are pro-life Maria.  Now, if we can get you to change your “homo” ways, you will have it going in the right direction!!

      • I hope that last sentence was meant tongue-in-cheek…

        • Anonymous

          I mean what I say knothead. I do not make statements I do not mean!!!!

          • I’m sorry to disappoint you, but I do not have so much as a single knot in my head. I do have a slight dent on the very top, from where I had a small benign cyst removed, so “denthead” would be accurate.

            Who is the “we” who want to get Maria to change her “homo ways”? I know it’s not the pro-life movement as a whole, because I’m pro-life and I’m bisexual.

          • Well, his post DOES have at least two likes, so that makes “we” I guess. Just sayin…

      • 12angrymen

        You need to sort out your priorities. 

    • Jordan Elizabeth

      Thank you, thank you Maria for helping prove that I am a pro-lifer and a Christian but I am NOT a pro-lifer BECAUSE I am a Christian. I think that we can all agree that it is wrong to kill innocent human beings regardless of our religion.

  • Grama Alice

    A good example of slut shaming is this article. I would love to meet another unbiased pro-lifer that has reasons beyond their religion or rigid morality for their opinion. In one sentence you claim to be that person, but in the next you prove yourself a liar. I hate that those of us with valid reasoning for our beliefs that are not based in hate towards other are such a great minority in this movement. I know what people think of us and it is all true because of people like you.

    • Sarina Normanton

      I’m a practising Catholic but that’s not why i’m pro life.

      I’m pro life because of a little boy called Ambrose.  Ambrose has Downs Syndrome.  When his parents found out, they were harassed to terminate to the point where they were threatened by doctors that their son would not receive any post natal care once he was born. So they decided on a home-birth. As a result, the most beautiful baby in the world was born.  When i first held him at 12 months of age, i couldn’t believe that there were people out there that had wanted him dead.  He looks like an absolute angel with his long blond hair and big brown eyes. Now at three he’s happy and boisterous. In that moment that i held him I understood that pro-choice is pro-murder.

    • not about hate? I don’t think you like unborn babies too much if you think it’s okay to kill them!

      • Jess

        Based on her post, it is clear that Grama Alice is pro-life.

    • truth4life

      One reason I oppose abortion is because I am an adoptee, and I’ve figured out that being adopted beats being killed.  And no, I am not making this up.  I really am adopted, and it really does beat being dead.

    • Alma

      You make no sense. She didn’t put any “sluts” to shame. And apparently you dod not read the part where she says she wasn’t Catholic at the time she became pro-life….

    • Egainesecho

      Try reading it again and use your mind, not your emotions..

    • APV

      You live in a small world. Just because you haven’t met any non-religious pro-lifers doesn’t mean they don’t exist: why would there be a group called the Agnostic and Atheist Pro-Life League otherwise? 

      If by “rigid morality” you mean “strictly defines ‘murder’ as morally wrong” then I really hope never to live in your world of looser morality, because I really like my right not to be murdered.

    • Hovish13

      I believe that medically, life begins at conception. There is no moral or religious value in that sentence. 

      If the pro life community were so interested in “slut-shaming,” then it would make no sense for us to help the girls and women who choose not to have abortions. We would not be giving these girls compassion, help, diapers, clothes, etc., at crisis pregnancy centers if we were only interested in “slut-shaming.” If I wanted to harass someone for their mistakes, you can bet I wouldn’t be pouring my love, free time, and money into it.

  • The Atheist and Agnostic Pro Life League is currently a group on Facebook. It’s a closed group, but those interested can ask to join, 

  • Mig

    Pro-life is pro-all of life. If you a pro-death penalty, pro-euthanasia etc I think the more correct term to use would be “anti-abortion”. Coz one of the things that I’ve noticed is that we get a lot of “you’re only interested until they’re (the babies) are born” which is not the case for a lot of people.

    • Mig

      Just sayin’.

    • lala


  • I just want to make it clear Im prolife because how can you seriously say that something that has a hearbeat isnt a person!? I am also infact pro gay and lesbian adoption and pro birth control!

    • scragsma

      Thank you for your honesty. But don’t you realize that chemical birth control (pills, injections, etc.) are actually abortifacient?

      • JJ

        Birth control bills can be used abortifaciently, but are not abortifacient of themselves. They are designed to prevent ovulation, which they do. No ovulation means no eggs, no possibility for fertilization.

    • withk

      There are many things with a heartbeat that aren’t people. Cows for example. I eat cows.

      • Amber Womack-Kitavi

        I guess I wasnt THAT clear Im not prolife for anyone else but myself I could careless what you do!

  • mother1

    Wow, what an excellent article!!  Straight to the point, honest, and true. 

  • can you be pro-life and pro-death penalty? sure, but you shouldn’t call yourself pro-life but anti-choice.

    • Bandshoosiers

      Disagree…the choice for the mother either comes before conception or if after conceived, she choose life, even if that means giving the child up for adoption if she doesn’t want him/her.  Re: pro-death, these individuals are adults that made very bad decisions and took other people’s lives away.  Babies are innocent, as the article explained.

    • 12angrymen

      Anti-abortion would be the more appropriate name.

    • Mig

      I wouldn’t say “anti-choice”, Tyler. I am sure that Kristen stands for many choices for women, just not the one choice of abortion. “Anti-abortion” yes, but “anti-choice” is very inaccurate.

    • guest

      This is really all semantics.  Most people know that if you say you are pro-life, you are talking about abortion not other ways like death penalty.  To me, if they aren’t pro-life in other ways they aren’t as moral as they make themselves out to be.

  • Bandshoosiers

    This hits the mark exactly!  Well stated.  I have heard all of these arguments by pro abortionists through out my life (I have always been pro life – even during my most liberal college years). 

  • Danielle421

    “I have known pro-lifers of every age, color, religion, and political persuasion. If you don’t, try to get to know some. They’re everywhere!”  As an Atheist, socially liberal (mostly) pro-lifer, I appreciate that part of the article more than you would know.  Sadly, this is a sterotype that is not only perpetuated by abortion supporters, but by other pro-lifers as well.  I decided last year that I wanted to volunteer at a pregnancy center, but out of the thirteen in my city that I contacted, the first twelve turned me down.  They all said it was againt their policy for an athiest to work there.  The woman at what is probably the most prominant center in the city told me, “It’s strange that you sound so casual about being both pro-life an athiest, when I dare say there’s a chance you’re the only one out there!  I have never, in my thirty years of doing this work, encountered someone who is pro-life and not a Christian or Catholic.  Probably because it doesn’t make sense.  The pro-life view is a religious one in nature, and I don’t see how you can find any way around that.”  I’ll never forget that disgraceful conversation.

    Also, just want to add, that you can certaintly be anti-abortion and eat meat, but you can not be pro-life.  The concept of supporting life encompasses all life, human or otherwise.  There’s a huge difference between a cow and a human, but they both have a life.  If you believed in the sanctity of all life then you wouldn’t believe in killing animals for sport, or slaughtering them for food or hide, when in today’s modern society, it is rarely necessary to do so.

    • Totally disgraceful conversation – besides the obvious disgracefulness, this woman is ignorant enough that she thinks Catholics aren’t Christians.

      Did the thirteenth one let you volunteer?

  • RyleighsMommy826

    I love this article! I’m 23 and I have always been pro life. it’s not a decision that was put into my head or that I was mad to believe. It’s a decision I chose on my own. Even as a little girl when I found out what “abortion” was and what it did I was disgusted and so sad for all those precious baby’s. A child is a blessing not a right. Most women who get abortions later regret them. I am a Christian so I believe that a human being is formed at the moment of conception. I mean just 18 days after conception that baby’s little heart is beating how amazing is that! It’s awfully funny that If a women is pregnant and murdered The person who murdered her gets charged with two counts not one, but I a women chose to kill her baby the doctor and her are free to continue on. Such double standards. I think there should be a limit on how many abortions a person can get and that they should have a viable reason to do so. This would help a little bit at least. You know what argument I love that pro choice women make: that it’s a women’s choice, you’re right it is and you made that choice when you laid in bed and had sex without protection or birth control. The choice was made now live with. I have a beautiful 3 month old little girl and I could never imagine not having her. Pregnancy is such a beautiful and amazing thing and my daughter is my world. I never loved someone so much as her and that started the moment I knew I was pregnant even before I found out I think I new and that love as grown every second ever minute every hour and everyday since. When I see her smile at me and hold my finger everything makes sense I was put on earth to be her mommy:). So I feel sorry for those who have abortions they are missing out on a miracle.

  • amloften

    Outstanding and full of truth…There is no comparison to taking the life of an unborn child to putting to death a criminal that intentionally, cruelly took the life of another or others.

    • 12angrymen

      You are right, it is hard to compare the two. However, things get cloudy when you find out that the person you put to death was in fact innocent. 

      • Guest

        And if they are innocent of the crime?  Then you just intentionally took a life.  That evil man run Texas and wants to become President intentionally murdered someone on Death Row at least once.  He had scientific proof that the man was innocent and still killed him.  He has also done everything to stop a commission put together for studying why Texas has so many cases many studied by the Innocence Project and proven the person innocent.  More than any other state.  He doesn’t want them to be found innocent he wants to kill them.  But he’s pro-life until you are born then he wants the ability to kill you.

      • scragsma

        Not so much. There’s a difference between discovering after the fact that you’ve made a mistake killing an innocent man who was duly convicted by a jury, and setting out deliberately to violently kill an innocent unborn child. One is a mistake, the other is a voluntary wrong.

        • 12angrymen

          So because it’s a mistake it’s okay? It somehow makes it less wrong? Someone is being killed for a crime they did not commit; they are innocent. And they must likely have a family. 

        • guest

          Perry didn’t find out after the guy was murdered by the state but before he was murdered.  Huge difference!  He had the ability to save his life, but purposely chose not to, because he hates that pesky little thing called science.  Innocence Project also only works on cases of people still alive.  They don’t deal with people already murdered.

          • guest

            Not to mention, he doesn’t want to fix the justice system in Texas which is repeatedly found to find innocent people guilty.  How many people have been murdered in that state who knows?

  • RyleighsMommy826

    I am pro-life because of personal choice and my own moral code not because of my religion, political standing or any other reason. I’m pro life because I know in my heart it’s right.

  • SaveTheInnocent

    Great article Kristen, you have a wonderful writing style! When you sum it all up, pro-choicers don’t want to deal with the argument directly, so they use diversion tactics like the ones you mention. For instance, I’m a man, therefore “I shouldn’t have any say about what a woman does with her body”. But if abortion is an immoral act, which it is, then morality has no gender, and abortion is wrong no matter the sex of the one pointing that out. If I beat my wife maybe I could just say to women, “you don’t know what it’s like to be a man and a husband so don’t tell me I’m doing something wrong”. Of course that would be absurd! Oh, and Roe V Wade was decided by an all male Supreme Court.

  • Egainesecho

    Thank you!  I admire your eloquent expression of the issue without resorting to thunder and brimstone holy rollers that we are!  lol!  In all seriousness, it is so hard at times to engage in discussion with abortionists and maintain your intellectual sanity.  Killing an unborn child is exactly that, killing a child, case closed.

  • 20&ProLife

    Thank you so much! As a 20 (almost 21 now) year old, on a liberal campus, it is nice to hear the voice of sanity speak. I am very into the Pro Life movement, and being told by friends that I am brainwashed and harassing women is getting tiring. No, I have never harassed any woman while I stand outside of a clinic. Actually, I am praying for every woman and child in that clinic! Thank you, and God bless!

  • Aimee B.

    i certainly appreciate this article very much! please look up http://www.lifemattersjournal.org for more secular & non-partisan discourse!

  • AngstyMcJoe

    I respect the fact that there are intelligent, rational people who are in the anti-choice movement. But, you in turn must respect the fact that there are people who are pro-choice who  are rational individuals who aren’t just people who love murdering precious googly-eyed babies for giggles, and that women who have abortions are just tricked to by the abortion industry or angry sluts who always use it for birth control because they can’t keep their legs closed.
    The fact is that ultimately, the anti-choice movement is trying to tell me, a grown woman, what I can and cannot do with my own body, and that is unacceptable. I never want to give birth. It is horrifying to me and an experience I never will have. I would remove the uterus from my body if I could, but that is impossible for me at this time for numerous reasons.     

    I know I will never convince anyone who posts on this site, obviously. And argue as you may with me, you will never convince me. Human beings, despite our ability to reflect on our own existence, tend to become very entrenched in our beliefs even when confronted by mountains of evidence that we are wrong. The best solution is to respect each other. That is all.

    • STOP calling us “anti-choice.” Or I will call you  PROABORTION. When we are stereotyped, it is used as a legitimate argument against us in the media, when WE stereotype we are “judgmental.” It’s bullshit.

      • guest

        How is he wrong in calling you anti-choice?  Do you believe in some situations abortion is all right?

        • Hoffmom

          Maybe you didn’t read the comment? Very likely, since you apparently missed the very obvious fact that “he” is a she…

        • Hoffmom

          Maybe you didn’t read the comment? Very likely, since you apparently missed the very obvious fact that “he” is a she…

        • Jess

          “Anti-choice” is a very broad term used to make said “anti-choice” people look terrible. After all, no one wants to be against choice.

          • Relock77219

            Hate to break the news to you, but you are against choice.  I can prove it if you’d like.

        • I am not against people making choices. I am against the killing of innocent human beings. He is wrong in calling me anti-choice, bc in order for me to truly be anti-choice, I would have to be against ALL CHOICES. That is clearly not the case. Furthermore, it is a slant and a straw man meant to  divert attention to what us pro-lifers are really about.

        • Dave

          He is wrong to call us ‘anti-choice’ because we are not opposed to ‘choice.’ (Blindingly obvious, when you bother to think about it.) Also, no one is in favor of ‘choice’ as such – that is euphemistic nonsense. We are – all of us – in favor of or opposed to particular kinds of choices. That you and Angsty (and the great majority on your side of the issue) apparently fail to understand this is why we have good reason to question the claim that so-called ‘pro-choicers’ are really rational (at least when it comes to thinking about the issue of abortion).

        • Dave

          Sorry – “She is wrong…”, not “He…”

      • Omnomnomnomnivore

        But… You ARE anti-choice. You’re anti-my choice to abortion.

        • But you ARE anti-choice. You are anti-your child’s choice to live.

          • Relock77219

            Let’s make it simple: a woman goes to a doctor, gets an abortion.  Both parties part ways satisfied.
            Question: How do you want the government to punish them?

          • Relock77219

            Hi Ana.  I’ve been waiting patiently for an answer to my question.  I’ll be glad to answer any of yours.  I’ll rephrase to make it more clear:

            Setup: abortion laws are as you want them–only YOU know what those laws are.  While these laws are in affect a woman somehow finds a doctor to perform an abortion.  It is performed successfully and both parties part ways satisfied.

            Question: How do you want the government to punish them?

            I look forward to your answer.

    • Hoffmom

      Well, at least you’re admitting your bias, and the fact that you are entrenched in your beliefs even when confronted by mountains of evidence that you are wrong. I’ll try to respect your point of view with that in mind. It’s a step in the right direction. Maybe the next step in the evolution of your character will take the form of recognizing that you don’t have an inherent right to harm another human being (for whose existence you’re responsible in the first place) because he or she inconveniences you. Because I, for one, don’t give a rat’s behind what YOU do with YOUR body (and seriously, that is a REALLY tired argument… I’m pretty sure we’ve established that it isn’t YOUR body whose mangled demise would result from abortion). I stand against victimization of the innocent. If you want to remove your uterus, I fully support your right to do so, and to participate in all of the wanton sex you desire. At the point where your sexual activities (wanton or otherwise) bring another human being into existence, it’s no longer YOUR body at issue. Four decades of the chant “My Body My Choice” hasn’t made it any more relevant or compelling.

      • Omnomnomnomnivore

        Until that sweet little bundle of unwanted adorable pops out of one’s vagina then it IS part of their body, in my opinion. It cannot survive away from the mother. IT IS ATTACHED TO THE MOTHER.

        And ‘My body my choice’ is incredibly relevant. It’s my body and I can choose to get rid of anything inside it if I see fit.

        • Isa241

          Well technically it’s not attached to the woman’s body. The fetus’s
          umbilical cord (which is a temporary organ) is attached to the placenta (also a
          temporary organ) which is then attached to the woman’s body. So the fetus and
          the woman are separated by two separate organs. Without those organs, a
          connection would not be possible because the fetus is not actually a part of
          the woman’s body. Your
          personal opinion does not change that fact.

          And yes the woman’s body is at stake here, but so is the
          body of another living human. The question is not who is more important or who
          has more rights, it’s which right is more valuable. The right to do whatever
          you want with your own body or the right to not be killed…

          And no, you do not have the right to do whatever you want
          with your body. Don’t believe me? Ask anyone who has been arrested for
          drug use or prostitution.

    • Grace

      Should I call you Anti-Life now then?

  • Bijoybalan

    What a ridiculous article. I don’t even think PR firms can spin it this bad.

  • Jeannine

    When I thought I was pregnant at 20, I planned to have an abortion. I became pro-life when I first heard about how abortions were actually performed. We wouldn’t euthanize Hitler in the way that these babies are killed – sucked, piece by piece from the womb, a rod stuck into their soft spot (partial-birth abortion), or starved to death. Murderers & rapists get MUCH better treatment than babies do prior to birth. It’s quite disgusting. And as you said, we as women have sex before we’re ready to have children, then we choose to murder the product of our choices.

    • Jerimiah

      Yes pro-choice is not about freedom of choice, but freedom from the consequences of choices which have been made. The worst part is it ends in murder. It is like a man cheating on his wife and the murdering her so he doesn’t have the difficulty and pain of divorce.

  • 229Mick

    Sorry, but calling them ‘anti-life’ because they call us ‘anti-choice’ just makes you sound bitter and stupid. I think calling them pro-abortion is clear enough. You’ve got the truth on your side. Manipulation if for people who know they’re wrong.

    • blugirl89

      I disagree; I think we should consistently use their tactics of changing vocabulary to further their agenda against them. They call us, “anti-abortionists” all the time; I believe that THEY are not only anti-choice (they don’t want women to make just any choice; they want them to have an abortion); they are most certainly “anti-life.”

      • Jess

        I have to say, I have met hardly any people who identify as “pro-choice” who want to force people to have abortions. These people do exist, but there are very few. I’ve always heard them refer to themselves as “pro-abortion,” although I have heard multiple definitions for that too.
        But overall, I would not say the “pro-choice” movement is really “pro-abortion” in that way.

        • I have to say, I hardly met any one who identified themselves as “anti-choice” force women to not make any choices.

      • Omnomnomnomnivore

        Except that you’re WRONG, missy.pro-choice just means choice. It means ‘Hey, have one or don’t it is YOUR RIGHT to choose. Not anyone else’s’ Do you think that pro-choicers like, break into pregnant women’s homes and haul them off to an abortion clinic? Nope. Sorry. We’re not the ones camping out in front of Planned Parenthood shaming women for exercising their rights.
        It is really none of your damn business what I do with my womb. I can pluck it out and turn it into a nice candy bowl. I can stuff confetti up there and throw a party. I could wear it like a hat. And I can DAMN well get an abortion if the multiple forms of birth control I use fail.Would you rather women, productive members of our society, go back to bleach and Windex douches? Throwing themselves down stairs? Dying from infections they got from dirty coat hangers? Because honestly if that women wants to get rid of the baby SHE WILL. Now would you rather it be done if a safe, controlled manner or have her drown the thing in a toilet? 

        • Any one who knows how to read, will discover that coat hanger deaths from illegally obtained abortions were wildly exaggerated. Ever heard of Bernard Nathanson? Also, by your perverted logic, we should allow rapes, thefts and murder bc the laws against them have not completely eradicated said behaviors. No it is none of my business what you do with your womb, any more than it is my business to tell a man what to do with his penis. But if  doing what you want with your womb means killing an innocent fetus, then it is my business. If a man wants to use his penis to rape someone it is my business. The right to do what you want with your body ends where doing so, involves harming another human being. And for the umpteenth EFFING time, it is not your body only. If that were the case, how come women pregnant with male fetuses are not medically classified as hermaphrodites? Something being inside of you, and being a built-in extension of you are two different things.

    • Zach Foreman

      I agree. I think pro-abortion/anti-abortion is the simplest, most natural and most neutral way of labeling. What’ wrong with “pro-life”? Well, it’s really pro-human life, since we aren’t protesting eating meat or wearing leather or using flypaper (or eating broccoli). And really we are not protesting capital punishment, or war, or lawful self-defense, etc. I mean, we could, but that is not the core. We are protesting abortion, pure and simple. So, pro-life isn’t wrong but a bit too broad. 
       What’s wrong with pro-choice? Well, it is totally inaccurate. Are they pro-choice when it comes to carrying guns in cities? Do they support people choosing to not pay taxes? Or choosing to rape? Of course, not. they are not pro-every single possible choice. They are really only talking about abortion, but don’t want to say it. They should rightly be called pro-abortion. But, they argue, they don’t want to require everyone to have abortions, but simply support it being an option, so therefore they are not pro-abortion. Rubbish. 
      What do we call someone who wants fewer restrictions on gun ownership (they don’t what everyone to be required to own a gun)? Pro-gun. What do we call someone who wants to legalize marijuana (but they don’t want to require everyone to smoke)? Pro-marijuana. When we say that someone is “pro-X” we mean that they want it to be legal, not that they want everyone to be required to have/do it! So, do pro-abortion people want abortion to be legal? Of course. So we should call them pro-abortion.

  • MLB

    I’m Conservative and Christian, but I’m not old. I think this article was great. 🙂

  • Anonymous

    No act compares to abortion in its heinousness. So don’t let anyone tell
    you that you must oppose the death penalty, or war, or meat if you are
    pro-life. Explain the difference between incidental death and
    intentional. Explain to them the difference between a cow and a human.
    Explain to them the difference between a convicted criminal and an
    unborn baby.

    Thank you for not pretending to value the lives of the born as much as the lives of the unborn.  Just out of curiosity: is the preventable death of an Iraqi fetus to collateral damage always less tragic than the preventable death of an American fetus to abortion, or does it depend upon whether or not the wartime death was caused by an antiabortion administration?

    • HKateD

      Well, if you are pro-choice, it really is a non-point because … (fill in the blank… not a child? someone’s choice? abortion is legal and a right …)  Eh … let’s just stick with choice, it sounds the most liberating … 

      • 12angrymen

        Well, what’s your answer to the question?

    • scragsma

      “pretending”?? LOL!!

  • guest

    Thanks for the good laughs!  You argue stereotypes with stereotypes.  I’ll truly believe someone is pro-life when they fight for Health Care Reform.  You can’t be pro-life and say kill them for getting sick after birth.  Insurance companies intentionally kill 10,000s of life every year.

    • guest

      Oh and by the way I’m pro-prevention.  Making abortion illegal doesn’t stop abortions they’ll just find another way of having one much more heinous then anything done today.  If you think abortions only started happening after Roe v. Wade, well honestly your dumb.

      • Alyxzandra

        Abortion is heinous whether it is done legally or not. It is the same result. Women getting harmed and the baby being killed. You are dumb if you think otherwise. 

        • guest

          More heinous darling, learn to read. 

      • blugirl89

        “your dumb?” no, I think you meant, “you’re dumb” once again, great argument! have you ever considered joining a debate team?

        everyone knows abortions have been around forever; pro-lifers more than anyone else (see, we actually use facts and real statistics instead of lies and manipulations).

        also, pro-lifers are pro-prevention too; it’s called abstinence, natural family planning. some even support the use of artificial birth control. once again, you’re stereotyping and not using facts. whether or not a pro-lifer thinks people should use pills and other artificial methods to prevent pregnancy or not, they definitely believe that people should not concieve a child if they do not plan to carry, give birth to, and raise that child…

        • guest

          Actually pro-prevention goes way beyond that.  It includes easy access to healthcare, making a rapist or incestuous person pay for their crimes, it includes making adoption an easier process and more people can adopt.  Since most pro-lifers are Republican which hates all of those things then you aren’t ever going to prevent.    It only takes having sex once to get pregnant.  I’m all for natural family planning I want to use that when I get married.  By the way I’m a virgin.  Abstinence is all wonderful and I’ll be teaching my child that but I’m not going to be stupid enough not to teach them proper birth control.  Hey look at Sarah Palin and her unwanted grandchildren.  Yep that abstinence thing is working well.  Not to mention all the teenagers that are having sex up the anal or  oral sex just so they can say they are a virgin.

          • If you bothered to actually research Sarah Palin and not just believe what people tell you, you’d know that A) she supports teenagers being taught about contraception in school, B) Bristol was on birth control when she got pregnant, and C) Tripp is FAR, far from an unwanted child. The entire family is nuts about that kid, if not nuts about the timing of his birth or who his father is.

    • scragsma

      Speaking from experience isn’t “stereotypes”. Kristin was reporting on exactly what she experienced from people who were trying to lay false stereotypes on her. And guess what: it’s exactly the experience of all pro-lifers, and the stereotypes aren’t true of any of us!

    • Guest

      Health care is the responsibility of free people.  If one is a slave? … Then it is the master who buys everything that is needed for the slave. 

    • Alyxzandra

      I am pro life and all for health care reforms in the U.S. As an American who lives in a country where there is universal health care for all I have seen both sides of the coin. I will take the system here over the health insurance companies greed. I watched my stepmother die from cancer because the insurance company did not think innovative treatments were cost effective 

    • blugirl89

      first of all, the writer of the post did not use a single stereotype of the anti-life side. in fact, she refuted the use of stereotypes by proving that many different types of people are pro-life (which means that many different types of people can be of differing opinions).

      second of all, how do you know she is not pro-“Health Care Reform?” the only way I can think you came to that conclusion is by stereotyping her as a conservative and/or Republican who does not support that program (and, by the way, “health care” is available to everyone – it’s called eating right, excercising, and taking care of your body. you’re thinking of “medical care,” which is very different, and which is what it should be called).

      third of all, I LOVE how you proved her exact point by delivering the “You can’t be pro-life and…” argument; did you even read the article?! she addressed that exact issue.

      finally, the pro-life movement has nothing to do with insurance companies – wow, I don’t even know how to address such an off-topic idea! next time, if you have a different opinion, share it; don’t sarcastically insult the writer with points that make no sense, just because she thinks differently than you do…

      • guest

        Actually she did.  From what I get from this article is this: All pro-choice are for all forms of abortion, don’t want to help them, don’t want to prevent, they are all athiests, and they are all dumb.  Then there is the stereotype of people who have had or contemplating abortion that they are all sluts, multiple partners, are asking for being raped, and just plain evil.

        Last time I checked my insurance is called United Health Care not United Medical Care.  Plus that’s just semantics.  On top of I get the feeling you think the only people who get sick are ones that are fat.  I’m neither fat, never smoked, rarely ever drink, don’t have sex, and I have health conditions a mile long.  The only reason I have health insurance is because my work provides it.  I would be turned down flat privately.  By the way, there is no Republican who supports medical care reform.  They tell the ill person to die.

        You go ahead and eat your meat if you want to, I happen to love meat.  You can support the war in Iraq which makes you as intelligent as Bush, but you can.  As for the death penalty you better be against it if you are Catholic.  The Church holds it only slightly less horrid than abortion.  On principle you have the right to believe in it, but you are going against your pro-life stance when you know an inncoent person is on death row.  There’s a man in Georgia, I believe is the location, who was found guilty on no science but witnesses which science has proven is very inaccurate.  He will be punished with death, because he can’t appeal his case since there is no science to disprove his guilty verdict.  All but one witness has changed their story.  Anyone that supports the death penalty in cases where the person is obviously innocent are guilty of their murder.

        So you are saying that the murder of innocent people after birth by the insurance companies is okay because they didn’t die in the womb?  I hope you never have to watch your child die a slow and painful death because insurance companies said your child deserves to die for being sick.

    • And you can’t say you support abortion because it is cheaper than raising that same child for 18 years, while opposing cuts to healthcare funding because “we can’t put a price on a human life>”

  • oldmanbob

    As an old, white, male, and Christian I will make two comments.  You who were born after 1973 are survivers.  As such it is no suprise that you are becoming pro-life.

    Second, there are rewards far beyond not getting pregnut or getting someone pregnut by waiting tell you are married to have sex.  You miss out on the STD’s, you build self control, you build up a life with your future wife or husband with out the risks of sex messing up your minds and bodies.  You build up trust between you and your spouse.  You know that more than sex holds you together and that a younger gal/guy won’t come in with newer better sex and leave you in the lurch.  In truth my wife of 42 years and Iove each other more now than ever and the practice of waiting is a foundation of our love for each other.

    • bubbalouwee

      These are excellent points.  We need to educate our youth in private schools to instill morals and values.  The public schools brainwash and indoctrinate with their propaganda and destroy morals and values.  Our communist government wants slaves of the state, not freedom loving patriotic Christian Americans.

  • I am a prolife Christian feminist, and for the most part I enjoyed this article, but I would like to point out a few things.
    1. In # 3, your phrasing bothers me: “He is brought to life and, in an abortion, he is killed, most often for the same reason he was conceived: because his mother made a choice.” This is a broad generalization that is going to turn off a lot of women to this article. First of all, it’s pretty insensitive to cases of rape (which I know are the rare case when it comes to abortion, but still, they happen). Secondly, it takes away all of the responsibility from the male partner, which is ridiculous. It’s as much the man’s choice to have sex as the woman’s; and the man can be just as involved in the abortion process as the woman – either by directly pressuring her to have an abortion or indirectly by not providing support. While I understand the gist of your argument is not meant to force all of the responsibility onto women, I’m just letting you know that it will be read that way by some people, which could hurt your cause.
    2. In #1, your arguments are good, but I wanted to point out one sentence: “She was merely having fun “slut-shaming” – doesn’t make sense. “Slut-shaming” is what Grimes is accusing pro-lifers of doing, not what she is doing. Your whole tone in that last part of the article was also rather condescending, which is not really going to endear you to anyone of the opposing view or bring them over to your side – which really should be the end goal, shouldn’t it?

    • 1. Yes, women are coerced, but “most often,” as I said in the article, abortions happen because the mother makes a choice. There are exceptions when the woman is threatened with physical violence, but again “most often,” even if she is pressured, it is still up to her to make that choice. I’m not gonna get into the rape thing. It’s used too often as a pro-abort qualifier. It makes up a tiny percentage of abortion, is no excuse for abortion, and again, I used the words “most often.”
      2. Yes, it does make sense. Grimes was pro-life because she enjoyed slut-shaming. Read the article again.
      God bless you for being pro-life, but I don’t write the way I do specifically to please or not please you. My writing style is what it is, and if you don’t enjoy it, you are not in any way obligated to read it. I am not interested in “endearing” myself to anyone. I tell the truth.

  • Guest

    With respect to #1, one of the abortion proponents’ favourite objections ironically comes back to haunt them.  In any debate, someone virtually always brings up the rare case of a woman pregnant from rape.  And virtually all pro-life activists, organizations, and philosophers reject abortion even in these tragic cases.  This is because a baby conceived in rape is just as much a human being as anyone else, because two wrongs don’t make a right, and because potentially reducing a rape victim’s suffering doesn’t justify killing an innocent person.  Pro-life laypeople and politicians are a different story.  The laypeople generally don’t know that much about the issue, and the politicians generally do have ulterior motives.

    A rape victim, uncontroversially, did not do anything wrong.  She is
    also, uncontroversially, the survivor of a terrible crime.  Yet
    pro-lifers still oppose allowing her to get an abortion.  Here, people who believe that the pro-life movement is really all about using babies to punish promiscuous women face a dilemma:

    1.  Pro-lifers are still all about “slut-shaming”, such that they will go as far as damning an innocent woman.  Some of the conspiracy theorists at RH Reality Check are definitely cynical enough to bite the bullet and take this horn of the dilemma.  However, I think that more level-headed people will have a tough time subscribing to this.  After all, pro-life activists are disproportionately female.  They also generally understand that being raped is one of the worst things someone can experience.

    2.  The pro-life cause isn’t really about “slut-shaming”.  We either have a different hidden motive, or none at all.

    Finally, all five of these myths are ad-hominem arguments.  Even if we are brainwashed, violent, religious, conservative, old, hypocritical and all round horrible people, that doesn’t imply that there’s anything wrong with our position.

    • guest

      Actually you missed an important arguement.  The case where a mother will die if she has the baby.  Almost all pro-lifers I have met say kill the mother and try to save the baby or the baby will die too.  It doesn’t matter to them if this is a mother of 2 children already.  That unborn baby is worth more to them than the mother.

    • Dmcook5

      I agree, I have found most of who I argue with to be men, and why not. This completely leaves the woman to be viewed as a “slut” by the man, and a sex object. It leaves them completely w/o responsibility and if the consequence happens he can just tell her to “take care of the problem, it’s her problem, not his”

  • Totally agree with the writer, good article in my opinio

  • I am sorry, but I HIGHLY disagree with number 2. I am consistently prolife…

  • Ehensley

    I am PRO CHOICE not anti life. Have an abortion or don’t. What you do with your body is not a decision that I have a right to make. I respect that that might not be how a “pro-lifer” views the agrument of abortion, but I am offended in being called against life because that is how I view it. I have a hard time believing that the average person who defines themself as pro choice is in any way in and for the idea of killing babies.

    • Dmcook5

      News flash, it is NOT my body. If you are pregnant it is not “Your Body”. It is a baby’s body. Separate DNA, possibly different gender, different bloodtype, different heartbeat, different fingerprints…completely different individual, ie not your body. If you are for “choice” in that context, that “choice” is killing a baby.

  • JB

    This is well written, these points need to be addressed more in pro-life/choice converstaions, but I can’t help but think there’s always going to be a group of pro-choice advocates that will just keep making those lame arguments anyway.  I think these arguments are mainly used to distract people from the real issue of the abortion debate, i.e. the fact that an innocent human is being killed. 

    They can’t take on the issue of abortion head-on because, let’s face it, the truth is not on their side, so they have to change the course of the debate with these ad hominem attacks.

    About point #4,

    They say pro-lifers are violent as if there have never been any incidients of pro-choce protestors being violent. There have been, they are just conveniently ignored, any stories that color the pro-aborts badly will not be brought up. 

    I’d say if a pro-lifer commits violence at least you can say he is being hypocritical to his own beliefs.  You can’t say that about being pro-choice, if you’re pro-choice than you believe violence (abortion) can be used to solve problems.  So while both sides may have people that resort to violence, it’s the pro-choice group that has more potential to incite violent people because they already believe killing can be a good thing.   

  • Dmcook5

    I read that article by that so called “journalist and comic”. So let me get this straight, because she decided that sex feels “great” and she likes “doing it” it is no longer a baby that is being torn apart, or at least she doesn’t care about it so much anymore! In other words, to you know where with the baby, it can be brutally murdered for all she cares, as long as she, and other women can get laid on a daily basis, and anyone who does care about human rights for these children are just mean old prudes who don’t enjoy sex and don’t want anyone else to either?
    What a nutcase!!!!!

    • Just a tip – multiple exclamation marks do not make you look sane. 

  • Maclauram

    I want respectfully disagree with this statement taken from your article : “You can’t compare anything to abortion, except certain instances of euthanasia, which by the way are also covered under the pro-life umbrella”. I would always compare euthanasia and abortion because in both cases you are killing a human being. Besides, maybe pro-abortion and pro- euthanasia people include these as pro-life choices…but common sense shows that neither abortion, nor euthanasia may be covered under the pro-life umbrella. 

  • Zach Foreman

    Between 50-100 people are executed every year in America. Let’s say 1% are innocent of that particular crime, but would probably spend the rest of their lives in jail anyway. That is an evil and a tragedy. But, it is not in the same league as the 1 million fetuses executed every year in America of which 100% are innocent, who are robbed of an entire lifetime, with no appeals, no judicial review, no clemency or pardon possible. 

    • 12angrymen

      Tell that to the family of the man or woman who was unjustly executed, tell that to the person about to be put to death. Is their life worth less because they are not a baby?

      • Why don’t you try explaining to the grieving grandparents why their daughter’s decision to execute their new grandbaby is okay because the grandbaby’s life is not worth as much because it was not yet born and thus had not become a criminal!

        • 12angrymen

          You completely missed my point. Many people, including Zach talk as if the life of an unborn child is worth more than that of a person wrongly put to death. If you are truly pro life, then how can you say one life is worth more than the other?

          • “YOU completely missed my point” ERGO… “You made a valid point and I don’t know how to refute it so let me change the subject.”

        • Execute, what nonsense. Perhaps said grandparents could have offered to provide lifelong primary care to said baby? What, they don’t want to? They don’t exist? They never knew about the zygote / embryo / foetus? 

      • Djushi

        I don’t think Zach is saying the innocently executed person’s life is worth less … I think he’s saying that the 1% of executed people, those who are innocent, is a far smaller number than the number of innocent and executed babies. Thus a lesser tragedy, because of the numbers, not the individuals.
        PS I oppose the death penalty (I think) but check out Let the Great Axe Fall, can’t remember the author …

  • Zach Foreman

    “are not abortifacient of themselves.”  But if they are taken after fertilization, then they cannot, of course prevent ovulation, but they can prevent implantation, which would make them abortifacient. 

  • Zach Foreman

    You falsely equate failure to prevent someone from dying (which is ultimately impossible) with murder, which is an outrageous distortion of truth. Even the best health care in the world cannon cure death. Abortion is the direct, intentional termination of life. This is NOT the same as not using all available means to forestall death, which, under some circumstances may be immoral. Where do you think insurance companies can get money to pay for medical care? They only can pay out what people pay in. Difficult choices have to be made and not every dying child can be saved. But, and this is important so I will repeat it: letting a child die is NOT THE SAME as dismembering a fetus in the womb. 
    In addition your statement “Anyone that supports the death penalty in cases where the person is obviously innocent are guilty of their murder.” is also a falsehood. They may be guilty of the sin of remote cooperation with evil but murder does not mean, and has never meant, anything other than the intentional, direct killing of an innocent human being. Supporting murder is not itself murder. It may be conspiracy and one may be an accomplice afore but it is not murder. 
    It is telling that all you can do is twist facts into lies, most especially twisting and turning the definition of murder until it fits your agenda. Truth is the ally of the pro-life movement, not to be found in the culture of death. 

  • Zach Foreman

    Why not replace the words in your argument with any other action, like rape. “Making rape illegal doesn’t stop rapes” Laws don’t stop rape either, so, should we legalize it? If not, why not? 

    • Comparing abortion to rape – says it all. 

      • Yikes

        Is this your entire argument?

        Your parents must be so proud.

      • OH PLEASE. I can’t tell you how many proaborts compared me with the TALIBAN for being pro-life. YOU guys are the side of ridiculous, intellectually dishonest comparisons, so don’t go there ok?

  • Zach Foreman

    I’m all for proper birth control too, which is decidedly NOT condoms, the pill or any other artificial means. If you don’t think abstinence works well, then why are you doing it?

    • Abstinence education and abstinence programs result in more unwanted pregnancies – and therefore abortions – than comprehensive sex education promoting barrier and hormonal methods. I’ve never gotten this anti-contraception, anti-abortion standpoint. Seems like an oxymoron to me. 

  • Zach Foreman

    All death is equally tragic, since all life is equally valuable. However, not all deaths are caused directly by immoral actions. For instance, a child dying of cancer is tragic, but there is no person to blame. We are not arguing that since an abortion is tragic, it can never be done. We are arguing that it is unjust and therefore can never be done. They are different. But collateral damage is by definition unintended, even if foreseen. 

  • Zach Foreman

    Why is it unacceptable? The government tells me what I, an adult male, can do with my body all the time. I must put a seat-belt on my body when I drive. I cannot put my body in traffic, but only in crosswalks with the light. I cannot put my body in someone’s private property without permission, or else I am trespassing. I cannot put tobacco smoke in my body on airplanes or buildings in many states. I cannot put the fist-part of my body forcibly into someones face, lest I be arrested for assault and batter. I cannot, without consent, put another part of my body in a person, lest I be arrested for rape. The list of things that the government says that I can and cannot do with my body is nearly endless. I cannot sign a contract with my body and break it with my body. Nor can I rob a store with my body. Oh, the injustice!!! How can the government tell me that I cannot steal, rape, assault, trespass, burn, etc with my own body!  And anyone who thinks these laws should apply to my body is clearly anti-choice and engaging in perp-shaming!

    Or maybe, just maybe, you think that we can do what we want with our own bodies AS LONG AS WE DON’T HARM ANYONE ELSE. Well, that’s a big exception. And what do we mean by anyone else? We can certainly harm them if they are much smaller than we are, right? Or if no one can see them, right? Or if they completely depend on us, right? So, if a woman wants to use her body to smash the newborn sucking at her breast in the privacy of her own bedroom, who are we to judge? We should just respect each other. That is all. 

    • Yeah, but the government cannot demand your body, your blood, your organs or 9 months of your life for the heinous crime of having sex. 

      • Yikes

        The government can demand the use of your body to provide basic care for your existing children, whether or not they are planned or wanted.  The nine months that everyone spends in-utero should be no different.  Neither case makes having sex a “heinous crime”.

      • But they can demand 18 years of compulsory child support. It’s funny how we live in world where feminazis screech about equality, while not noticing the inequality of the fact that no one can force women to be mothers, but if a man doesn’t want to raise a kid, he is shit out of luck if the mother chooses life.

  • Zach Foreman

    “anti’ means against. “choice” means… choice. So, calling someone anti-choice means that they are against all choices, such as the choice to eat bacon for breakfast, or the choice to use velcro straps on one’s shoes. This is patently ridiculous and totally false. In this bizarro world, “choice” is a euphemism for “abortion” which is itself a euphemism (since abort simply means “to stop”) for terminating the life of a fetus. These euphemisms piled on euphemisms clearly indicated a discomfort with abortion of living human fetuses. 

    • Nope, it’s simply a response to anti choice activists calling themselves ‘pro-life’ which implies that pro-choices are anti-life, which is ridiculous. I just think the lives of grown women matter more than the ‘lives’ of zygotes – which isn’t a euphemism, it’s a scientific term for a stage of foetal growth. 

      • Guest

        If you’re going to pretend to have respect for science, don’t put ‘lives’ in scare quotes.

      • It’s not whose LIFE matters more, it is whether the right to choose to kill an innocent human being is more for a RIGHT  than the right to not be assaulted in the womb. If every pregnancy  was done to save the mother’s life then you would have a point. However a VAST majority of abortions in this country are elective.

  • What if a person cannot afford a child? Birth control fails? A fetus is not a baby, it’s cell tissue with the ability to grow into a child. I have an aunt who miscarried within her first trimester, and a years later got pregnant again. No one remembers the miscarriage as it was only a fetus. She’s a nurse and understands that. An abortion is similar to a miscarriage, as in it’s not the actual death of a human being. I respect any persons choice in keeping their child, if my wife were to become pregnant, I would want to go through with the pregnancy. If a person though decides to abort due to financial stress, harsh living conditions for children, not old enough, potential health risks, or basically hate children, then let them be. It’s their lives, not yours. You cannot guilt a person for having sex. A child should not be punishment for anything if they don’t want it. Studies have shown that women are damaged psychologically from unwanted pregnancies, not abortions.

    There’s nothing wrong with it. It’s a great form of population control. Fetuses aren’t sentient. People are. It’s also YOUR body. Not someone else. There’s more to having a child then just being able to carry it and birth it. There’s the fact you need to raise it, devote time and thousands of dollars to it. Adoption is also a horrible option as thousands of children each year live in foster care, and usually couples wanting to adopt are biased in wanting children of their ethnicity.
    I’m aware all of these myths aren’t true. If you don’t like abortion, don’t get one. Plain and simple. A fetus is not a person, you are. A fetus in the first trimester is basically equivalent to a skin growth and a parasite of the same species. Did you know that dogs when under stress can force a miscarriage in their bodies? We as a species need an option, not a forced decision. 

    • Me

      Adoption is a “horrible” option? Adoption is a way for the birthmother, if she chooses, to give her child a chance at a good life that will NOT possibly result in the child ending up in a bad situation and ADDING to the numbers of children in foster care! (many, if not most, foster parents also provide a good, loving environment btw)
      Also, many people including myself would have no problems adopting a child of another race if they were adopting? I personally cannot raise any child myself, but that’s another story.
      P.S. As to the “bundle of unwanted adorable” comment in another post, IMHO it’s one thing to mock grown people, but mocking an innocent child who may potentially be about to be murdered? Oh right, it’s not a child, and it and the process of killing it must also be described with various National Spelling Bee* words by so many.
      *ok, opening round regional spelling bee words maybe, but the idea is the same.

    • Me

      Adoption is a “horrible” option? Adoption is a way for the birthmother, if she chooses, to give her child a chance at a good life that will NOT possibly result in the child ending up in a bad situation and ADDING to the numbers of children in foster care! (many, if not most, foster parents also provide a good, loving environment btw)
      Also, many people including myself would have no problems adopting a child of another race if they were adopting? I personally cannot raise any child myself, but that’s another story.
      P.S. As to the “bundle of unwanted adorable” comment in another post, IMHO it’s one thing to mock grown people, but mocking an innocent child who may potentially be about to be murdered? Oh right, it’s not a child, and it and the process of killing it must also be described with various National Spelling Bee* words by so many.
      *ok, opening round regional spelling bee words maybe, but the idea is the same.

    • Me

      Adoption is a “horrible” option? Adoption is a way for the birthmother, if she chooses, to give her child a chance at a good life that will NOT possibly result in the child ending up in a bad situation and ADDING to the numbers of children in foster care! (many, if not most, foster parents also provide a good, loving environment btw)
      Also, many people including myself would have no problems adopting a child of another race if they were adopting? I personally cannot raise any child myself, but that’s another story.
      P.S. As to the “bundle of unwanted adorable” comment in another post, IMHO it’s one thing to mock grown people, but mocking an innocent child who may potentially be about to be murdered? Oh right, it’s not a child, and it and the process of killing it must also be described with various National Spelling Bee* words by so many.
      *ok, opening round regional spelling bee words maybe, but the idea is the same.

  • Carmonster64

    i love the myth about being old and religious, i belive in gay marriage, hate religion…look at all the wars and bloodshed it caused and wait for it…im 17 years old

    • papist

      Hi Carmonster, just a correction; religion does not cause wars, greed for political power, and conquest for wealth does. In the secular 20th century more people were killed by athieistic communism and national socialism than all wars in the prior 2,000 years COMBINED. If you rank wars by body count no religious war ranks even in the top twenty.  

      Don’t blame religion or judge its’ teachings by the actions of sinners trying not to sin.

      • Religion doesn’t cause wars? Please; if you can’t afford a history book, wikipedia can help you inform yourself. 

    • Djushi

      Hey, and I’m against gay marriage, I’m a follower of the Way (aka an unashamed Christian), and I also think the myth about being old and religious is … mythical! Religion sure was used as an excuse by many people to kill many other people … think the Crusades and murders of Muslims, the atrocities of the Middle Ages, the Catholics killing the Protestants, the Christians being mass-murdered in various countries as I type, etc. As ‘papist’ says below though … Stalin and Mao were athiests. Evil people will use anything as an excuse to be evil. Plus, logic tells us that the Truth is the Truth regardless of what people who claim to believe the Truth do.
      Go Life!!!
      Oh, and wait for this …. I’m 17 years old too …

    • I’m going to add a new stereotype by saying that the majority of pro-lifers i’ve met have been young, born again Christians, or people that haven’t yet experienced miscarriage, or an unwanted pregnancy. 

      • Yikes

        That’s just as ridiculous as the five listed here.

  • NG

    Great post, Kristen. I really appreciate your spirit. I do have one criticism though (I’m firmly pro-life btw). I think you downplay here, to some degree, the violence that a certain segment of the pro-life movement is prone to. It’s a good argument, when a person brings up the murder of doctors and others, to compare the numbers (50 million to 8), but the violence people are referring to includes other things as well (assault, attempted murder, arson, vandalism, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence).

    The more I read about the movement (I’m relatively unfamiliar with the inner goings-on, though again I am pro-life) the more I think that the violent and aggressive element is probably closer to the fringes, but it’s still nonetheless a part of it, and we should come to terms with it and/or be prepared to answer the pro-choicers when they bring it up.

    (This is not to say I don’t understand much of the violent reaction. I don’t condone it, but I do understand it. Terrible injustice is going to provoke reactions of all kinds.)

  • Just a note; saying “Make promiscuous girls feel bad about themselves.”

    Calling girls promiscuous is a gendered slur designed to make women who have sex feel bad. Therefore it is slut shaming. 

    Can I ask what you think about curbing the behaviour of so called ‘promiscuous’ men? 

    • Yikes

      I don’t oppose abortion for the sake of curbing promiscuous behaviour.  I oppose it because it demonstrably kills a human being.  I fully support holding both men and women responsible for their actions.

  • The ‘choice’ is dislodging a cell, zygote, embryo or foetus, depending on how far along it is. 

    Perhaps if more people were for factual sex education, free contraception, free healthcare, free welfare, adoption reform and stem cell research (to help eliminate progressive diseases), there would be less abortion. But hey, why go for prevention when you can ruin women’s lives? The latter is much easier. 

    • Yikes

      The ‘choice’ is starving, dismembering, poisoning, or chemically burning a human to death, depending on how far along it is.


      The evidence available suggests that the things you listed can only reduce abortion by a very limited extent, if at all.

  • ‘Pro-lifers use facts and real statistics’. Not often. Perhaps some pro lifers do, but I’ve seen plenty peddle lies, about abortion effects, adoption stats, child poverty, contraception (i.e. contraception is an abortifacent, contraception causes AIDs). 

  • Pro choice people aren’t ‘pro-abortion’. We’re pro contraception, pro prevention, pro-women’s rights, which includes having a safety net if things go wrong, which they inevitably will. 

  • If you had, you’d know that the baby was a result of date rape. 

  • “Well, at least you’re admitting your bias, and the fact that you are entrenched in your beliefs even when confronted by mountains of evidence that you are wrong.”
    Can you see the irony in saying this?

    • Yikes

      It would be ironic iff she had said something similar herself (that she would never change her mind in light of any type of evidence).

  • I believe grown living human beings are more important than potential human beings. 

    • Yikes

      What’s a potential human being?  Whatever it is, I do hope that it’s friendly.

      How big does a human being have to grow for you to consider it important?

  • No one wants to be ‘anti-life’ either, but pro choicers are routinely accused of so being. 

  • Rather than praying, perhaps you could do something practical to make it easier for women to carry babies to term?

    • Yikes

      You mean like running and volunteering at crisis pregnancy centres?  Last I checked, pro-lifers do both.

  • I’m afraid you’re wrong – please see the NHS’s website for a factual description of what chemical birth control does. 

  • The word ‘promiscuous’ is a slut shaming word. 

    • Yikes

      I was paraphrasing.

  • Victims are not legally on trial. Via media, communities and juries, they most definitely are. There’s an assumption in society that the majority of rapes are false accusations – a ‘fact’ not borne out by actual crime statistics. The majority of rapes go unreported because rape victims are frequently harrassed, disbelieved, ignored, asked if ‘they’re sure’ etc. 

    also, pretty sure ‘slut-shaming’ refers to a whole gamut of behaviours, from blaming rape victims for their rape, to hating women for having sex, to hating women who dress in a way you regard as ‘too revealing’ – which for certain far right Christian groups, can mean having your hair uncovered. 

  • Perhaps the OP was talking about things like the Hyde Amendment, where rape was ‘redefined’ so that date rape, statutory rape and incest were declared as not rape, so that women affected by these kinds of RAPE could not obtain an abortion. 

    • Yikes

      You really think the definition of rape is dependent on whether one can obtain a taxpayer funded abortion?  That would imply that doing the right thing and removing the exceptions would be equivalent to abolishing the legal definition of rape.  I think this is ridiculous and insulting to rape victims.

  • Relock77219

    Question #1:
    Could you please define “pro-life”?  This term appears to have multiple meanings.

  • Relock77219

    Hello Kristen-
    Could you please define “pro-life” for me?  Thank you.

  • Eliza McGuire

    You can not be pro life and pro death penalty or pro life and pro war. Being pro life means doing your utmost to protect life in every situation. With regards to being for the death penalty and pro life we do not have the right to take life and if pro life, you should not support those who take lives, or wish death upon someone, no matter what they have done.
    Irish – American Pro Lifer, anti death penalty, anti war