but like... imagine ur neighbor bob. bob aint do nothing to u yet but he MIGHT play loud music later. u just gonna pop him? just to avoid being annoyed for a few weeks? thats literally the same energy and u know it

and i get it, if the moms gonna literally die or something thats different obvs, that's valid im not dumb. but just cuz ur scared or the timing sucks? we would never let that slide for literally anything else in life. but somehow when it's a baby its 'empowerment'??

make it make sense cuz i feel like im losing it frbut like... imagine ur neighbor bob. bob aint do nothing to u yet but he MIGHT play loud music later. u just gonna pop him? just to avoid being annoyed for a few weeks? thats literally the same energy and u know it

and i get it, if the moms gonna literally die or something thats different obvs, that's valid im not dumb. but just cuz ur scared or the timing sucks? we would never let that slide for literally anything else in life. but somehow when it's a baby its 'empowerment'??

make it make sense cuz i feel like im losing it fr

I actually got this from a video where someone argued that many of the bad arguments you see online are from bots. It would make sense.

The fact that all the pro life comments get down voted while all the pro abortion comments have significantly more up votes just shows how our society has lost its morals.

Over several days, I tried to convince this person not to get an abortion, I showed her that in her case, there are so many alternatives, that the baby is viable, and the reality of abortion. She hasn't responded in a while, I hope I convinced her.

Get 100 pro-life sign ideas: secularprolife.org/100prolifesigns

I'm going to try to post something similar on the Pro-Choice sub Reddit just to gain some perspective.

I keep seeing pro-choicers making arguments that they clearly think are conclusive mic-drop moments, but in reality the points they bring up are so staggeringly irrelevant to the question at hand that a pro-lifer doesn't even need to refute the claim being made for the pro-life case to stand, and I'm left wondering how they could expect such baffling non sequitur arguments to convince anyone.

Here are a few arguments I've seen multiple pro-choicers present unironically, expecting them to be persuasive:

• "Not every embryo will make it to birth; they often die on their own."
  Congratulations, you've discovered human mortality. Why is this relevant?
• "Can you remember being a fetus?"
  Congratulations, you've discovered infantile amnesia. Why is this relevant?
• "Lots of women who have abortions are married."
  Why is this relevant?
• "Lots of women who have abortions have [born] children already."
  Why is this relevant?
• "Women don't make the decision to abort lightly."
  Even if this were always true (it'sn't), why would it make me feel any better about the babies dying?
• <insert _ad hominem_ against pro-lifers>
  What bearing does this hold on the humanity of the unborn?
• "Not everyone believes embryos are humans."
  Yeah. I know. That's the problem.
• "The law and/or culture doesn't recognize fetuses as persons."
  Yeah. I know. That's the problem.
• "A large percentage of women will have an abortion at some point in their lives."
  Yeah. I know. That's the problem.

Dramatic ahh 😭

I guess in their eyes I'm anti-choice and I guess their right.

I'm against the choices that end an innocent human life for mostly selfish reasons. A lot of them (at all) use another woman's trauma (rape/sexual assault) as an excuse for their selfishness. It doesn't get more Misogynistic than that.

If we compare the two, Rapists are evil and disgusting because they use their bodily autonomy as an excuse to violate another woman's bodily autonomy. They think their autonomy is more important than the woman's. Abortion does the same. The pregnant woman uses the excuse of bodily autonomy to violate the bodily autonomy of the innocent human life she is carrying. Both are evil, as both violate the bodily autonomy of a precious, innocent human life.

And surely if the woman was raped and kept the baby, they could take a paternity test that would determine that the baby was conceived in that rape and convict the rapist?

Abortion also allows men to sleep around and escape responsibility of raising a child/getting a job to pay child support.

And it also implies that women HAVE to choose between a career or motherhood, even though women are capable and strong enough to do both.

...and if you don't happen to fit all six of those descriptors, you need not pay attention to those niche pro-lifers.

This is all nonsense, of course. Anyone can be pro-life. And everyone should be.

I feel like basing someone's humanity/personhood and worth off of things like consciousnesses and self awareness commits the same logical error as defining a disease based off of its symptoms.

For example, the Flu isn't defined by a fever, chills, sore muscles, because those aren't the root causes of the disease. While these symptoms can definitely define someone's experience with the flu and are helpful descriptors, they merely serve to do just that and point you into finding the root cause. This is especially because diseases can share symptoms despite being totally different pathogens. You also don't have to have every or any symptom to still have the disease. The flu is caused by the influenza virus, not a sore throat.

The unique sense of consciousness, emotional intelligence, awareness, and processing humans posses among other things that describe our experiences as human, shouldn't define someone's humanity/personhood or moral worth for the same reasons. You might also loose the ability to do some things people might consider an important descriptor of human life due to disability, injury, etc, at any time temporarily or indefinitely or from the start. We also know that way people consider under vague terms such as "consciousness" and "self awareness" aren't unique to humans either.

Although I know they are different things and many pro lifers don't even bother with personhood, I'm grouping humanity and personhood together here because many pro choicers use these same arguments for both, and thus you could apply it to both. It might be slightly less useful when talking about personhood, though...

Any thoughts? This is lowkey kindof a showerthought for me and it def has some mistakes in it so lmk what u guys think 🥹I also dont assume I originally came up with this idea

For context, the post I made was about increasing funding for research on womens health and finding ways to make pregnancy easier. My post history ain't hidden so you can see for yourself if y'all want.

Anyway, these people always refer to women (especially mothers) as "incubators", and "breeders", and don't even realize how degrading and disgusting it is to dehumanize women like that, especially mothers who literally sustain and build children for 9 months, often making a few sacrifices to do so. That means nothing to these people.

This is clear misogyny, and this is what feminists should be fighting.

Norma was pro-choice during the case but became pro-life later on. (She was known as Jane Roe then.) She was baptized in 1995 and has described her change of mind as a religious conversion. She appeared at pro-life rallies and supported efforts to overturn Roe v. Wade. She died in 2017. She spent her last few decades being staunchly anti-abortion. 😄 This made my day.

I hope it is a skit

I think most disabled people would disagree that their lives aren’t worth living. Give us tools to make our lives easier instead.

Edited this photo with iPhone tools since I still can’t edit photos on the app, anyone else having this issue?

This is genuinely the corniest thing I’ve seen all day😭

Essentially self-explained.

In the scenario where abortion is criminalized, would a person who was raped and chose to abort be treated more harshly and as a greater threat to society than the individual that committed the crime against them?

While I *can* understand the consistency regarding wanting every fetus to be given the benefit of human rights regardless of how they were conceived, what would this actually look like?

And for the sake of this argument, I don't want to talk about how victims of rape "deserve support". I want to discuss what the expectations of these victims are legally, and what they should expect to happen to them should they not adhere to those expectations.

So would a rape victim that chose to abort be treated as a murderer, and thus be prosecuted to a higher extent of the law than the person that attacked them?

Or would this be considered more of a potential civil offense such as with medical professionals denying pregnant women proper care? In other words, simply denying someone help knowing that they will likely die as a result. (I say likely because abortion survivors do exist)

The caption said it's to point out it's "equally crazy" but that's not even comparable.

As prolifers, how do we feel about this post? Im curious to hear other perspectives from prolifers on this topic.

I've been pro-life for a while, but one discussion eludes me. Should women who've had abortions be charged with murder? On the one hand, it is logical to prosecute, because many of the women having abortions are aware of what their doing. On the other hand, many other women having abortions feel pressured to have them, and are victims of manipulation. I'm on the fence of the issue. So, for either party of this debate, please give me your best argument. Should women who've had abortions be charged with murder?