The hypocrisy of being "pro-life"

Akita Suggagaki said:

I thought this would be about the other hypocrisy, that is not tending to the health support and food of the newborn and mother.

For example:

Trump’s $4.8 Trillion Budget Would Cut Safety Net Programs and Boost Defense

Click to expand...

This is a stronger criticism, and one I agree with.

As I'm pro-life, I see it necessary to ensure a child's welfare even after their birth.

Credos4Christ said:

Just eye-balling the premise, I can spitball two possible explanations:

'Pro-lifers' have a lower rate of need to adopt, as they tend to be traditional and therefore (unless infertile) are probably more likely to have biological children.

Click to expand...

I guess this is a good reason to not save babies lives?

Credos4Christ said:

The foster-care system is severely underfunded, underregulated and badly mismanaged, which leads to abuses and inefficiencies that don't afford children the families and care they need.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a job for Pro-Life marchers and banner wavers.

SkyWriting said:

I guess this is a good reason to not save babies lives?

Click to expand...

Hahaha. More just that it's not a practical solution to ask all pro-life families to double, triple or quadruple the sizes of their families. Nor would most people be able to. Foster-care reform will be the most practical solution, as well as strengthening the safety net which we'll need to catch people from falling through the cracks.

SkyWriting said:

Sounds like a job for Pro-Life marchers and banner wavers.

Click to expand...

Believe it or not, a number of pro-life org chapters are already starting to sound the adoption alarms across the country.

Credos4Christ said:

Believe it or not, a number of pro-life org chapters are already starting to sound the adoption alarms across the country.

Click to expand...

"Already starting" yes, that could be.

ChristianForCats said:

I don't even know what NARAL is.

Click to expand...

They're the major legal advocacy organization associated with the pro-choice movement, and they've been trying for a while to silence anyone who thinks that abortion is in any way suboptimal or shouldn't be permitted in all three trimesters.

I used to be involved in the pro-choice movement, and one of these advocacy organizations sent me a survey a couple years back where all the options offered for your stance on abortion were variations of: "legal up until the instant of birth." That was when I started unsubscribing from everything.

I wish I could find a liberal rather than conservative article, but this is unfortunately where we are now: Feminists Erupt After Andrew Yang Calls Abortion a 'Tragedy' at a New Hampshire Forum

If we could witness abortions firsthand, and see how barbaric it is, i doubt abortion would have as much support that it currently does.

ChristianForCats said:

There is nothing barbaric about putting a woman taking a pill that causes premature stillbirth.

Click to expand...

Can you rephrase?

ChristianForCats said:

Over and over again so-called "pro-lifers" say two things that butt against each other:

1. Contraception is a form of abortion, especially the morning after pills (Plan B).
   
2. There is no reason to have an abortion because women can use contraception.

Uh, what? People want women to prevent unwanted pregnancies but not use the devices which were invented solely for that purpose. You can't have it both ways. If you do not want anybody to use contraception, you must love abortions of unwanted embryos and fetuses because using contraceptive pills and devices prevents them.

I also have seen "pro-lifers" speak out against mandatory sex education, which is the only way to make sure all girls and boys learn about contraception and abstinence. Again, if you want all girls and women to avoid having unwanted pregnancies, you must support this requirement for health teachers in every public and private school.

Reducing abortions will not happen by making them illegal. All that would do is make most abortions very dangerous, even life-threatening. It will not reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. If you want the number of abortions to be nearly zero you must support everything that would effectively reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies because desperate women will seek untrained people to remove fetuses out of their bodies.

So what do you want, fewer unwanted pregnancies or a lot of sick women occupying jail cells?

Click to expand...

I believe only Catholics believe in no contraception whosoever.. and in the U.S. that is a minority opinion, one most Catholics don't even practice..

I know while Islam is against any form of contraception, the majority of Muslims practice the use of contraception, especially those who live in the west.

So saying the majority of pro-lifers are against any form of contraception is a misnomer, since most people in the west, including the majority of pro-lifers, do believe in the use of contraception..

I know for myself I almost died giving birth to my son, and my doctors thought it was likely due to my young age so I used contraception to prevent pregnancy until I was a little older.

I had more problems with my next pregnancy 7 years later than I did with my first and actually died while giving birth, so the doctors determined it was just too dangerous for me to carry children, and I had my tubes tied upon medical recommendation.

I've never personally met very many women who are both pro-life and anti-contraception. My closest friend is Afghani, (raised in Afghanistan and immigrated here) and she loved living here in the west because she could choose the amount of children she had as well as when she had them. She was, however, vehemently anti-abortion as am I.

So I think your basing your assumptions on a very few, rather than the majority. Most people see a difference between pregnancy prevention and killing a developing child in the womb...

ChristianForCats said:

1. Contraception is a form of abortion

Click to expand...

Sorry, I have never heard this and I don't believe it is true. Contraception is... contra-(con)ception. It is meant to prevent conception and pregnancy. Abortion requires a zygote, and a zygote requires conception, so contraception is not an abortion.

...especially the morning after pills (Plan B).

Click to expand...

Plan B, among other things, can prevent the implantation of a zygote, in which case it would cause an abortion (from the pro-life perspective). This effect of Plan B is very different from traditional contraception.

Historically Christians have opposed contraception, but that doesn't mean that it is the same thing as abortion.

I'm conflicted on all sides by the whole subject. On the one hand I don't want murder, that's clear. I don't want abortions to be something people take lightly or do for elective reasons.
But there are 2 medical reasons where I am really really torn about it.
1. Ectopic Pregnancies and other threats to the life of the mother. An ectopic pregnancy would be fatal to both the mother and the child. So it has to be done or you lose both.
2. Fatal Anomalies of the child. Having worked in NICU there are some times where a child is very much wanted but there is a fatal birth defect, something where the neonate cannot survive outside of the mother's body, and it is hours or days of absolute agony and there's nothing we can do to save them. In those cases I'm moved to compassion, and wonder if abortion in those cases may be what causes the least suffering. I pray and I don't have any final answer on that.
3. This is the one where it's like I really don't even have a start of an idea on how to deal with it is rape where the mother absolutely does not want to bear the child. Outside of being able to transplant it into a surrogate or artificial womb I don't see a way that preserves the life of the child without forcing a woman to bearing something thrust on her out of an act of violence. Adoption doesn't cover the burden of the prengnancy itself, or the pain of childbirth that was unwanted, or the sometimes life long physical consequences from it. Now if a raped woman is willing to carry the rapist's child and bear it, amen, bless her. But I can understand being unwilling, and that puts things in a very tough spot.

I LOVE children! I LOVED baby-sitting as a teen-ager. I loved the siblings who were born after I was. I loved caring for them. I have 12 grandchildren and 3 great-grandchildren. I love my special needs grandchildren as much as the others. I love children of all races!

So much coping for justifying killing the unborn.

ChristianForCats said:

Over and over again so-called "pro-lifers" say two things that butt against each other:

1. Contraception is a form of abortion, especially the morning after pills (Plan B).
   
2. There is no reason to have an abortion because women can use contraception.

Uh, what? People want women to prevent unwanted pregnancies but not use the devices which were invented solely for that purpose. You can't have it both ways. If you do not want anybody to use contraception, you must love abortions of unwanted embryos and fetuses because using contraceptive pills and devices prevents them.

I also have seen "pro-lifers" speak out against mandatory sex education, which is the only way to make sure all girls and boys learn about contraception and abstinence. Again, if you want all girls and women to avoid having unwanted pregnancies, you must support this requirement for health teachers in every public and private school.

Reducing abortions will not happen by making them illegal. All that would do is make most abortions very dangerous, even life-threatening. It will not reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. If you want the number of abortions to be nearly zero you must support everything that would effectively reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies because desperate women will seek untrained people to remove fetuses out of their bodies.

So what do you want, fewer unwanted pregnancies or a lot of sick women occupying jail cells?

Click to expand...

Your logic is flawed. An abortion is the termination of a pregnancy, e.g. a fertilized egg in the woman, which is growing into a baby. Contraceptives, regardless of nature, prevent the actual conception/fertilization of the egg.

ChristianForCats said:

Over and over again so-called "pro-lifers" say two things that butt against each other:

1. Contraception is a form of abortion, especially the morning after pills (Plan B).

2. There is no reason to have an abortion because women can use contraception.

Click to expand...

This is a false syllogism. We do not argue that contraception is a form of abortion rather forms of the "pill" and morning after pills that act as abortifacient are in fact forms of abortion. If you are speaking of contraception as a means of preventing fertilization to begin with then you will find much debate among pro-lifers. I believe that distribution of contraception (that prevents fertilization) is far more preferable than abortion yet is itself a moral hazard. This is rather poor attempt at getting pro-lifers to defend the indefensible based on a false premise.

ChristianForCats said:

I also have seen "pro-lifers" speak out against mandatory sex education, which is the only way to make sure all girls and boys learn about contraception and abstinence. Again, if you want all girls and women to avoid having unwanted pregnancies, you must support this requirement for health teachers in every public and private school.

Click to expand...

We pro-lifers do not object to sex education. Rather we object to state run mandatory sex education that is devoid of a Christian understanding of sex, child rearing, contraception etc. And it does not follow that by having "all girls and women" have a sex ed requirement in every public and private school lowers teen pregnancies. In fact, the lowering of teen pregnancy rates have more to do with the intervention of parents not the state. The source the article cites is the Guttmacher Institute which is affiliated with Planned Parenthood. Not exactly the paragon of Christian virtue but data speaks for itself. Again, the arena for proper sex education is the home, not the classroom.

ChristianForCats said:

Reducing abortions will not happen by making them illegal. All that would do is make most abortions very dangerous, even life-threatening. It will not reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. If you want the number of abortions to be nearly zero you must support everything that would effectively reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies because desperate women will seek untrained people to remove fetuses out of their bodies.

So what do you want, fewer unwanted pregnancies or a lot of sick women occupying jail cells?

Click to expand...

Actually, making abortion illegal would dramatically reduce the number of abortions. How does that not follow? What it would do is make abortion the abode of the wealthy who will travel to have the procedure done. Perhaps some would seek out lower cost means of obtaining an abortion that would be dangerous to the mother. Yet Recall that every successful abortion ends in the murder on an innocent life in the best of medical conditions. Abortion in every instance is dangerous for the child. Yet it does not follow the way to reduce the number of abortions is to make the procedure legal. The argument is absurd on its face.

And who said anything about jailing women who seek an abortion? If you have listened to anything the pro-life movement has stated in the last four decades is that we believe women who seek abortions are victims of circumstance and possibly forced coercion. We have never advocated the jailing of women who seek abortions.

So another words everything you wrote is wrong.