What If Abortion Weren’t a Possible Choice?

A Response to the Pro-Choice Objection of Unwanted Children

Imagine a world without abortion.

Estimated reading time: 5 minutes.

"Fantasia," where abortion is not possible

I don’t mean just a world where abortion has become illegal or unthinkable. I want you to imagine a world where abortion doesn’t exist at all, because it’s not possible. In this alternate universe of Fantasia, the uterus is different than in our world. Women have “super uteruses” that can withstand a great deal of external interference while protecting the baby inside. This means miscarriages almost never happen and women can drink and smoke during pregnancy without harming the baby. However, doctors in Fantasia are limited in what they can do during a pregnancy. They cannot perform an amniocentesis, fetal surgery, or use ultrasounds to see into the uterus because of the reinforced structure. Abortions are not able to be performed because the procedure is literally impossible to carry out without also killing the pregnant woman. Hence, in this world, if a woman becomes pregnant, she only has two options: parent the child or place the child with an adoptive family.

Stop Using “Trust Women” as an Abortion Trump Card

trust women

Estimated reading time: 4 minutes.

Imagine you were talking to someone about child abuse, and they said, “You know, I understand that you’re personally against it, but I think we should trust parents to make the right decisions for their families.” Would you feel like their comment about trust was a meaningful contribution to the discussion or a bizarre red herring?

When abortion-choice advocates speak about abortion they often say we need to trust women to make their own decisions. They say that abortion is an especially personal choice that we should trust women to make for themselves because they are the experts of their own lives.

trust women

trust women

This rhetoric is an unfair representation of the pro-life position because it implies that pro-life people do not trust women. It insinuates that people oppose legal abortion because they think women are inadequate and unable to make choices about their lives. This is a common and false accusation of pro-life people.

Pro-life people are not opposed to abortion because they distrust women. Implying that misogyny is influencing their position on abortion is a misleading sidestep of the real issue. Pro-life people think that a woman should be able to make her own decisions about which doctor she wants, what clothing she wears, her career, her education and many other choices which men have as well. There are some choices, however, which are dangerous or violent in some way. These choices deserve careful examination by the public to determine if they should be against the law. Examples of these choices would be drinking and driving, vandalism, or assault. The choice to kill people should clearly be against the law. Pro-lifers argue that human embryos are people, so you can’t kill them.

Fellow Pro-Lifers: Please Stop Sharing This Straw Man Meme

Editor’s Note (4/17/24): There are two major problems with the meme this article uses as an example. First, it straw mans the pro-choice view; this is the logic problem explained in the article. Second, it’s derisive toward the pro-choice view it fails to understand; this is a tone problem. Some versions of the “your body/not your body” meme don’t have the tone problem and are used by pro-lifers respectfully and courteously, though all versions have the logic problem.

 

“My body, my choice” is possibly the most common slogan in defense of abortion right now and an embarrassing number of pro-life people completely misunderstand it. Consider the following popular meme:

Estimated reading time: 3 minutes.

meme

Hilarious right? Aren’t pro-choice people stupid? Aren’t they logic-impaired?

No. Please stop.

To what is “my body” referring in the “my body, my choice” slogan? Pro-life people far too often incorrectly assume that it is the body of the unborn. If that was the case, then yes, it would be a dumb thing to say. Let’s call this the Scientifically Ignorant View. That is almost never what pro-choice people mean. They mean the parts of the woman’s body that are affected by pregnancy, such as her uterus, vagina, ovaries, etc. Those are indisputably her body parts and pregnancy affects them.

The pro-life mind is naturally inclined to be focused on the unborn, and understandably so. They are being killed daily by the thousands. Almost nothing justifies killing a human person. But to most pro-choice people, even if the unborn is a human person, women have the right to kill the unborn if they are inside her body. This is the Bodily Rights View. Shouting that the unborn is a human being does nothing to respond to the Bodily Rights View. Absolutely nothing.

Pro-Lifers Aren’t “Forcing” Women to Stay Pregnant

Image: Man forcing a woman to do something.

Estimated reading time: 4 minutes.

Pro-choice advocates constantly describe the intentions of pro-lifers with the word “force.” “Pro-lifers want to force women to stay pregnant, force them to have babies, force them to go through pregnancy, force them to be a parent.” All of these statements are common, and all of them are false.

The word force implies a threat. It implies violence. It implies aggression. It’s a tragic irony given that the aggression, violence, and threatening behavior doesn’t come from pro-lifers, it comes from doctors killing babies.

The pro-life position is simple: you don’t get to kill people, very young embryos are people, so you don’t get to kill embryos. It’s very straightforward.

It is true that by saying “don’t kill the embryo,” other things naturally follow from that, such as “go through pregnancy, give birth, and either raise the child or give him to someone else who will.” But that isn’t the same as forcing someone to do these things.

If it sounds to you like I’m just playing semantical games, consider the following case:

VIDEO: Pro-Life Apologetics Speech at Students for Life Conference

My pro-life apologetics speech from the 2017 Students for Life of America conference in D.C. has been posted! This talk includes a few ideas that we’ve never spoken publicly about before.

The speech includes these topics:

  • Why I avoid accusing people of committing logical fallacies, and what I do instead;
  • The four-step method of trotting out a toddler that we’ve found to be most effective;
  • How to respond and how NOT to respond when people say “No one knows when life begins.”
  • Three reasons why the Equal Rights Argument changes more minds about abortion than any other personhood argument we’ve ever tested;
  • Why every pro-choice person must choose between one of three extremist options;
  • Three implications of standard bodily rights arguments.

Resources:

  • Click here to learn more about the Equipped for Life Course.
  • Click here to apply for a scholarship for the Equipped for Life Course.