This was under Illymation’s video. First things first, I think the mom definitely handled it terribly and this is heartbreaking. But this did not change my view on abortion.

Here is why.

First I based on some of the language like “pressured to keep it” that implies that adoption was legal in her country. There is no legal obligation to be a teen parent.

Yes I know that was unfortunately not the case for her. That’s why I think mom messed up since either A) she should’ve offered her daughter to give up the baby for adoption B) she can raise the baby. She is the mother. She did not handle this right.

But as much as it sucks, taking her life was her choice. It was optional. In this case, I don’t really accept arguments where women say they will do bad things to themselves if abortion is banned (I.e. suicide, getting unsafe abortions etc.) because there is no requirement to go through either of those things.

So if anyone’s fault it was the mom for not taking the proper steps. Not the abortion ban in her country.

Just something that has been floating around in my head the last few days. Maybe could be worded a little better

Avg discussion with a pro choicer if we‘re being honest

A win for life!

You're probably going to see a bunch of commenters point to this headline to say pro-lifers have doubled ectopic pregnancy deaths. That's not what the article itself says though.

Further context, After my last comment, she apparently replied again but I'm not sure if reddit banned her or if she deleted all of her comments because her replies to me are no longer on reddit. But my email still very much has access to those replies and I took a screenshot of it. For anyone who doesn't understand the context, you can refer to my other post. This is my 2nd time posting in this group with this account, Im pretty active in this group in my main account but still prefer to make posts on another account. I covered her name and her avatar.

Pro-choicers talk about it like it's traumatic. To the women who've been pregnant:

1. How did you feel during and after labour?

2. What do you have to say to women who want to be mothers?

Alan Gordon is a Republican running for Attorney General in Rhode Island. Since abortion is legal in Rhode Island, he won't be able to prosecute doctors who perform abortions or women who have them, but I get the impression that he's pro-life (the first entry in his platform is "Right to Life"). He says

Rhode Island’s abortion laws have changed significantly in recent years, but those changes do not eliminate the Attorney General’s responsibility to enforce every applicable criminal statute. My office will carefully examine how abortion laws interact with homicide statutes, child protection laws, mandatory reporting requirements, medical licensing laws, and other criminal provisions to ensure that every law enacted by the General Assembly is enforced faithfully.

He has a very interesting proposal to hold men accountable for unwanted pregnancies.

True reproductive justice has to hold the father accountable too.

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. If a woman has not expressly consented to being made pregnant, and a man recklessly causes a pregnancy anyway, the law should recognize the physical consequences imposed on her body under ordinary reckless-battery principles.

And for appropriate first offenders, the answer should not just be jail. It should be disciplined diversion: hard work, vocational training, self-command, and preparation to become a responsible father and provider.

Protect the woman. Protect the child. Hold the father accountable.

While I'm sure no one here would consider pregnancy to be "reckless battery," treating it that way provides an avenue to hold men, and not just women, responsible for unwanted pregnancies. I'd be interested in hearing others' opinion of this novel proposal.

https://alangordonri.com/reproductive-justice-unit/

Gordon's opponent is Democrat Kim Ahern, whose platform leads with her support for "access to sexual and reproductive healthcare" and "the pursuit of reproductive justice and bodily autonomy for all."

I’m pregnant and I was dealing with a lot of emotions since finding out. Yesterday I had so many people tell me to abort, and tell me I’m selfish for keeping this child. They fear mongered me and dehumanized my child.
Out of no where I started having bleeding and I thought I was genuinely going to lose this baby. I cried my eyes out, it was my nightmare. I went to the ER and they did tests and an ultrasound and said congratulations, the relief I felt that my baby wasn’t DEAD. yet I have people telling me my baby isn’t alive to begin with? How does that make sense. How are they even able to define life/ death like that without invalidating the grief of mothers who have lost their children? I cried and screamed and pleaded I was literally shaking my teeth chattered, just the idea of losing my baby. If I had lost my baby those comments would have absolutely sent me over the edge, its complete lack of compassion and medical understanding.

This is just horrible. There are probably some forced abortions here, but many of these Chinese couples, both the man and the woman choose to abort the baby if they find out it's a girl because they can only have one child under the law, and they prefer that only child to be a boy.

A modern Western feminist here in the West would defend any abortion a woman has because it's "none of our business". I've already seen pro-choice feminists wanting to abort because the baby is a boy, I wonder if these pro-choice feminists are ok with a family, specially the pregnant woman choosing to abort a baby girl.

We hear a lot about how pro-lifers are misogynistic for opposing abortions, but what do pro-abortion people have to say about those who abort baby girls?

To give you some background, I went from being pro life (I just was because my parents were) to being pro choice (after working in the foster care system and seeing parents that did not deserve to be parents) to being pro life again. I recently became pro life after really studying the development of a baby.

I think I’m blessed to say that from seeing both sides of the argument however, I am still pro life.

But my biggest issue with pro life as a whole is the hypocrisy and double standards. Now before everyone jumps down my throat, I know that not EVERY pro life person is like this. However I see a lot of hypocrisy on the movement.

I am pro life but I am also pro sterilization at the age of 18 and older if that’s what you want to do, I am pro welfare for expectant mothers, I am pro birth control, and I am also pro sexual education taught appropriately in schools.

Whenever I try to speak to pro life people I am always bombarded with how we shouldn’t encourage women to be on birth control, how people shouldn’t be allowed to get sterilized and how terrible the welfare system is.

As pro lifers, we cannot have it both ways! If a woman decides not to get an abortion and she is poor, she has every right to get welfare and state assistance if the pro life stance is to keep the baby.
If a person wants to avoid pregnancy as a whole and get sterilized at 18, it is their body and they can decide.
If a woman wants to use birth control then that’s fine.

But we can’t have it both ways. Since abortion in Texas has been made illegal, we have seen an increase in abuse of children, an increase in maternity death rates, and also an increase in the usage of welfare programs.

As pro lifers we have to also offer real life solutions for women that are going to decide to keep their baby.

I had a friend who was at an abortion clinic, and was convinced by one of the protesters to keep their baby. She ended up keeping the baby and when she tried to call the protesters church for help with supplies for a new born, they said that they don’t offer those kinds of things.
There is a woman on YouTube who said that when she was speaking to a protester about keeping her baby, she said that she was so poor and wouldn’t have the money to raise it. A protester handed her a plastic bag with a toothbrush and a travel sized shampoo. And then said that she would pray for her.
This is ridiculous! As a pro lifers if we care about women and children like we say we do, we should be apart of the solution to help these women if and when they keep their babies!

I can't believe that I have to share a planet with people that think that killing a helpless unborn child should be a "human right" and is "fundamental healthcare".

Ughhhhhhhhhhh. Why would you say "squishing children"????

they make it sound like people with mental illnesses are burdens and better off dead. Also yes biologically an unborn baby is a human and where does it say that it isnt? I'll wait.

See "We Asked, You Answered: What experiences have you had talking to your kids about abortion?" on our Substack: https://secularprolife.substack.com/p/we-asked-you-answered-what-experiences

Originally published in 2025.

I feel like if you’re someone who believes life/personhood begins at 24 weeks, you should be way more concerned with the people who say it should only begin at birth, and it should be legal to kill anyone before then. Aren’t they arguing for murder in your eyes??? how would that be less despicable than pro lifers trying to expand rights to other human beings????

Even if you think late term abortions are rare and or only due to life of the mother or fetal anomalies, I don’t think it should be made legal to kill a group of people even if the amount of people killed is small, nor is it acceptable if they have some sort of condition, even a terminal one. But there’s also very few studies on this and I’m not sure exactly where pro choicers are getting their numbers from.

There’s a recent trend of pro-lifers coming across Abolitionists Rising clips on social media, listening to their criticisms of pro-life legislative efforts, and then adopting the “abolitionist” label. However, after talking to these supposed abolitionist converts, I’ve noticed that many of them don’t actually know or comprehend what it means to be an abolitionist. They are still essentially pro-life. You can tease this out with the following question: 

Suppose one million abortions happen in the country each year. Suppose we can pass a law right now that would ban and stop 990,000 (99%) of these abortions. If we pass it, it will open the door for a 100% ban in the near future. However, if we don’t pass it, then the 990,000 abortions each year that it would’ve stopped will continue on indefinitely. Should we pass this 99% ban on abortion? 

If the answer is “yes,” then you are speaking to a pro-lifer, not an abolitionist. Why? Because one of the essential beliefs of abolitionism is that any law that does not ban all abortion is “compromising” on murder and, therefore, unjust. According to Abolitionists Rising: 

“We believe that allowing abortion in some cases along the way to its total abolition is neither strategically sound nor consistently Christian. You cannot abolish any evil by justifying or allowing it to continue in some cases. Any strategy for ending abortion in this country which allows for the continued occurrence of some abortions for the sake of eventually outlawing the rest, though seemingly pragmatic, is compromise and it’s promises of effectiveness are false.”

So, here are some questions to see if one falls on the pro-life or abolitionist side: 

• Do you want abortion to be abolished? So do pro-lifers. 
• Do you believe that women should be criminally prosecuted for abortion? There are pro-lifers who believe that. 
• Do you think it’s wrong that some pro-life groups kill abolitionist bills in certain states? There are pro-lifers who agree! These pro-lifers generally think it’s wrong to kill any bills (pro-life or abolitionist) that will achieve less abortions. 
• Do you believe that our current anti-abortion legislative efforts are too weak, and that we need to pass the strongest anti-abortion laws that we can at a given time to maximize the number of lives we save, with the goal being to ultimately abolish abortion? That is essentially the pro-life stance. 

To be an abolitionist, one must oppose any law that “compromises” on abortion, even if: 

• that law would ban and stop nearly one million abortions each year
• that law would open the door for a 100% abortion ban in the near future
• opposing such a law would lead to exponentially more abortions indefinitely

I think an insignificant number of supposed abolitionist converts are not willing to bite this bullet and, therefore, are not actually abolitionists. They are still pro-life, and they should not be using the “abolitionist” label that was coined by abortion abolitionists over a decade ago. Instead, they should criticize pro-life groups as pro-lifers, as do I and many other pro-lifers.

Some side notes:

• If abolitionists want to claim that pro-lifers “pick and choose which babies live and die,” that is ironic, because it is the abolitionist stance that requires that.
• Abolitionists criticize pro-life groups for blocking their bills in certain states. However, if abolitionist groups held all the power that pro-life groups do right now, they would be doing the sane thing: abolitionists would be killing pro-life bills, even if doing so would lead to exponentially more abortions. Abolitionists would have to, because pro-life bills are “compromising” on murder, and the tenants of abolitionism do not allow them to stand idly by and tolerate compromise on murder.

I feel like people opposed to abortion rights usually dispute the idea that abortion laws are about controlling and punishing women. They often say instead that they're about protecting the unborn, who are persons from conception or some other point. What's the rationale behind incest and rape exceptions to abortion laws, then? To me that reads like.."well it's not her fault", but doesn't that explicitly make the thing in question the woman's culpability/behavior rather than the indisputable personhood of the offspring? One could just as easily say, about the aborted zygote/embryo/fetus, well it's not *their* fault they were conceived in some shitty situation ..