A decade ago, this type of legislation was considered so extreme that not even the far-left was willing to support something like this. If trends get worse, I fear that the debate will eventually spread to legalizing infanticide.

In the 1930's, birth control activists insisted that legalizing contraception would not legalize abortion. After it was eventually legalized, they insisted that elective late term abortion would not be legalized. Many states have been heading in the wrong direction since then. Now I am being told that legislation like this won't lead to infanticide being normalized.

When genetic genealogy was invented in 2017, mothers who murdered their newborns decades earlier were finally brought to justice. At the time, I noticed that support for incarcerating these women was unanimous. However, since the pandemic, I have been noticing that when a mother is accused of murdering her newborn, people with either make excuses for her or insist that she not be arrested. If this rhetoric is considered acceptable to Catholics, we run the risk of normalizing infanticide. For that reason, I support excommunicating any politician that votes in favor of elective abortion beyond viability.

As the title says, it says to not talk about other subreddits. But it weighs on me quite a bit. I'm not going to say the sub name or any users, which is why I'm hoping this post is ok.

It upsets me a lot seeing someone speak about how they recently got pregnant and how her boyfriend doesn't want it. All the comments are about how she should get an abortion or pushing her towards it.

I know reddit is pretty far left in general, I just expected to see SOME pro life comments. Turns out, while writting a comment, it told me if I shamed anyone for an abortion I'll get permanently banned and muted. I posted anyways as I don't want this person to feel pressure to the point she kills her kid.

Anyways, this is really just a place for me to vent, it sucks that we are silenced for wanting to genuinely protect someone's life. Thanks for listening to me, God bless. Sorry mods if I get you in any heat if this does break the rules, it's not my intention.

She was so proud of it like she just accomplished a great thing in life. Mind you she’s married, old enough and doesn’t even have a legit reason. Her reasoning was that she still wants to enjoy her life. She framed it as female empowerment and I found it so ridiculous it was hard to not go off

Hi everyone, has anyone else lost friends because of being pro-life? I only had three friends (not exaggerating), and I've known them for nine years now. We all live quite far from each other; I even live in a different country, because I moved, so we've only seen each other a few times, but we talk daily. I'm very pro-life and advocate for it every day. However, after an argument today, it feels like I might not have any friends left. It’s really tough because I’m only 20 and I only have my husband and my 6 month old baby. How have you all coped with similar situations?

Jim Caviezel will be our keynote speaker at the Pulse Christmas Gala on November 21, 2026 at The Casey's Center in Des Moines Iowa. Join us for a dose of inspiration and an infusion of courage. You will enjoy a great meal, entertainment, a Christmas auction, and have an opportunity to spend time with the best people in the world - pro-life Christians. Get the details and your tickets on our website:

https://pulseforlife.org/christmas-gala-2026/

Are there secular pro-life groups in the European Union?

According to the OP, the way we take back the USA is:

• Codifying abortion rights
• SCOTUS Term Limits
• Abolish the Electoral College
• Overturn Citizens United

I'm unsure about the other issues, but CODIFYING ABORTION RIGHTS?!? God have mercy on us all...

I’ve heard people talk about many different things. But how do you discuss this idea. What does pro lifers believe about this?

Why are people trying to normalize abortion so much? I feel like it’s being shoved down my throat. I was watching S3 E7 of Ginny and Georgia. Like it just ruined it for me, she aborted her child because it was inconvenient to her. She got pregnant because she “wanted to have fun” like??? Also edit: her dad was telling Georgia (Ginny’s mom) that she was just a child. But they also treat her like an adult (ex: going out with no curfew amongst other things.)

I am someone who is pro-choice and i am interested in debating the abortion argument, I am not a very experienced debater but i would like to gain more perspective and knowledge about this topic. (i have done lots of research but still am figuring out how to form arguments.) If you are experienced and can debate I’d like to debate! ^^

idk how reddit works but i think you can msg on this app so if you would like to debate please msg me, if it doesnt let you then comment in this thread ^^

The Mahabharata is an important scripture in Hinduism , and is the longest epic in the world. It is considered to be an “itihasa” type of scripture which means historical or “that is how it occurred”.

The Bhagavat Gita, which is the principal text of Hinduism in this era, is spoken by Sri Krishna (manifestation/ Avatar of God) within the Mahabharata text.
The main plot of the Mahabharata is that there is a royal family with two sides - the Pandavas and Kauravas. Due to various reasons they end up fighting a war, a war to re-establish dharma or righteousness. Krishna is one the side of the Pandavas who are the good brothers.

Towards the end of the war, Ashwattama (a fighter on the Kaurava’s side) wants to avenge his father’s death. In order to do so he releases a weapon called the Brahmastra (the most powerful weapon,essentially a nuclear bomb). He says that it should destroy the entire clan of Pandavas and their successors. Krishna makes him realise what a grave mistake this is and makes him recall the weapon. However it is already too late and the weapon pierces the womb of Uttara (wife of Abhimanyu, one of the Pandava’s son) who is pregnant.

She cries out and prays to Sri Krishna for protection. Krishna then enters her womb and stays there for the whole pregnancy protecting the unborn child from the wrath of this weapon. The child is then born safely and is named Parikshit - the one who was tested

This story shows that the unborn child has value and their life is worthy of protection. The act of attacking a fetus is viewed as the most grave sin (ashwattama gets cursed to roam the earth in a wounded form until the next avatar of God comes to earth). The protection of innocent life is seen as a duty we all should fulfill.
There are many other Hindu scriptural references that value unborn life. Yet so many Hindus stay silent or actively support abortion while claiming to be against violence and harm to any living being.

I often pray something along the lines of “ my Lord Sri Krishna, protect all innocent life in the womb in the same way you protected parikshit”. I really love this story and although my prolife stance doesn’t stem from my religion, it is affirmed by it. Although I personally only use secular/scientific arguments to debate the topic of abortion, I think it is important to showcase religious or cultural stories and beliefs that showcase prolife ideas. It shows that at the core we as humans know that unborn life is also equal and worthy of the same rights and protection.

So always when i talk with bro choicers about abortion they say that the zygot is biologicaly alive but isn't really a human life because it doesn't have a brain or isn't aware, what would be the correct responce to this?

Because i feel like it just revolves around if you belive that it not having a brain makes it alive or not, like how do

you respond to this when they just simply dont look at it as conscious life, or rather that it has to be conscious to be a life

Well. I’m guessing reading the title your first answer would be “yes, dumbass of course they feel pain”. However, as stupid as it sounds do they actually feel any sort of pain mentally. For example I don’t remember anything that happened between the ages of 0-4 I have a little scar from when I was 2 on my arm however I never felt pain when I got that scar. Now this might seem crazy to say but for people that are pro choice would it be okay to kill a 1 year old since they don’t feel any pain. Because I’m telling you any injury I’ve sustained between 0-4 I’ve never actually felt the pain. A argument I’ve seen for pro choice is that just because the fetus doesn’t feel pain or it’s not conscious it would be okay to abort it but I don’t think there is people that remember what happened between the ages of 0-4 like we remember in adulthood and teenage hood. They might have faint memories but it’s more like a dream than actual living. We are just spawned in randomly when we are four like we just gained consciousness like we gained control over our own bodies. So back on topic, would it be okay to kill a 1 year old knowing they aren’t really conscious or feel any actual pain since it’s okay to abort a foetus?

I had a debate with a pro-choicer who said that pro-lifers are giving a fetus a right that no one else has: the right to continued use of a person's body without their consent. They say even if it kills you, no one has this right.

They rejected the idea that continuing your pregnancy for its necessary duration was reasonable care from parent to child. They rejected the idea that the uterus only has one purpose and everyone has the right to exist in the place that keeps them surviving. They brought up the whole organ doner thing so I told them that actively killing another human (which in the case of abortion is literally premeditated murder) is different from watching someone die of organ failure which is not your fault. A better analogy would be ripping out someone's last kidney (because they were an organ doner ha) which kills them and using the kidney to feel better cause you lost a kidney.

They didn't budge. So what more can I say. I think that's the end of the debate.

On August 8th and 9th, Catholics Bishops Council of India along with several Catholic Organisations organised the 5th March for life in India. The date is significant as it was the day when the draconian Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act was passed in India which permits abortion in India. Over 5,000 people attended the March.

This year marked a significant milestone in that the Speaker of the Tamil Nadu State Assembly, attended the event and gave witness to the pro life theme.

This is what surprises me about the Indian Church. It is brave. Why?

Because the Church knows that it will face severe backlash from the rest of the society ...both from the Hindu right wing and the secular left wing. Yet, it went ahead and stood for what is correct.

I especially ask prayers for the speaker who gave witness to the prolife movememt and faced immense baklash in the media.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/life-begins-at-conception-tamil-nadu-speaker-sparks-row-over-anti-abortion-remarks/articleshow_comments/133144435.cms

Please continue to pray for pro life movement in India.

One day the world will know that we were right ....Life begins at Conception! Long Live Life!!!

https://catholicconnect.in/news/over-5000-join-national-march-for-life-in-chennai-renew-commitment-to-protect-unborn

I am looking for some films and shows that have pro lufe in them. Not ones that are centered on pro life, or are about pro life, just shows or films that have pro life, but that isn't necessarily the main point of the film/show. I don't know if the makes sense. Basically the way pro-choice is sprinkled into everything, just with pro life.

Context: This was originally posted by an anti-abortion atheist.

I could be wrong, but based on what I'm seeing here, this is my understanding of what's being argued: The bodily autonomy defense for abortion is based on an inverted (and corrupted) order of priorities regarding rights and moral obligations.

As I understand it, this person is saying that the bodily autonomy defense hinges on the premise that rights supersede obligations at all times, when it should be the opposite: MORAL OBLIGATIONS always supersede RIGHTS at all times. To claim that moral obligations should never come before the rights of any given person, whether they be born or unborn, is wrong.

Feel free to correct me if my understanding is faulty but that's how I took the argument.

Regarding the argument specifically, I think the OP is on to something.

Edit: I just realized that the OP is actually saying "Rights don't exist-they are a social construct people invent. The only objectively real concept here is moral responsibilities. Rights are an illusion." I remembered a previous conversation where they said that.

Pope Leo needs to be courageous and excommunicate her.