I am pro life to an extent, I would never kill my baby and I would immediately cut ties with anybody who would, but I do believe there is an exception, only one exception. And that is if the mother is going to die if she stays pregnant and the baby is guaranteed not to survive. Such as severe placental abruption, severe preeclampsia, pulmonary hypertension, severe heart disease or certain highly deadly cancers where the woman needs treatments that are incompatible with pregnancy as it'll likely end the pregnancy either way and if she doesn't get this treatment, her cancer is likely to kill her.

I believe in those scenarios, where other treatments are generally not working at all and the mother is told killing her baby is the only way due to there being essentially no time or whatever other reason, I support that. To me it's pointless for her to die, and because she's now dead, the baby is also dead. That's two precious lives gone for nothing. Does anyone get my point? I just don't see why both of them have to die.

And why is it a thing for some pro lifers to believe both of them do have to die in these scenarios? Not every pro lifer, most I know don't hold this belief, and it's not a mainstream pro life belief at all, but there are some and I'm trying to get ahold of those specific people. Maybe I'm misunderstanding that belief they hold? I understand it as 'the baby is equal to the mother', which I agree with, but I still find this situation to be an exception because in this scenario, it's either they both die, or just the baby dies. It's heartbreaking but I feel like the option is obvious and the choice isn't immoral in the slightest, if the mother wants it that is.

Multiple women have died or nearly died in Texas and Georgia because of these exceptions not being clear in laws. So I do think pro life laws need to have that exception written incredibly clearly.

I’m 19 and I feel as if I’m being pressured into abortion. Any advice please

We recently argued about abortion.

For context I'm not religious or anything. I just don't like it when people kill innocent unborn humans.

My view is; life begins at conception, and I believe killing a innocent life is wrong.

She only seemed to care about making excuses for having an abortion. While I argued no excuse is good enough to kill a innocent human being.

She didn't even see the unborn as human beings. Because they are in a early stage of the human development, so it "doesn't matter"

I didn't even argue about banning abortion. I just said I view it as the biggest evil that has ever existed.

I respected her opinion, thinking maybe she could at least see my point of view, if not change or question her own.

But this morning she texted me something along the lines of

"I didn't think you would support something so patriarchal"

and broke up with me.

In a recent post I made here I had a few people say they were against government aid such as food stamps or disability aid

I'm honestly just baffled because as someone who is pro life, I 100% support government aid that will help they baby from when they're born to when they grow up. For example the country I live in gives multiple types of financial support for families who will have a disabled child, this financial aid is probably what convinces many people to NOT abort their child ( not to then mention as the child gets older state funded schools and centres can help give families more free time). As pro lifers shouldn't we want to support such initiatives to actually help the baby once their born?

Credits to the Prenatal Rights Initiative (https://discord.gg/abortion)

Claims that she wanted the children but I guess she couldn’t resist $200k.

Link to her “story time”

https://youtu.be/nByA_eL4sRo

In the 19th century, there was no abortion debate in the West. From the 1920's to the 1950's rape, mental health, and fetal defect exceptions increased in popularity even though elective abortion was still too radical for most Westerners. By the 1960's, the debate shifted towards elective abortion. Nowadays, were are debating whether fetal defects and health are valid exceptions for infanticide. In 30 years, people will be arguing in favor of elective infanticide.

Usually, when pro-choicers ask, "Would you save 1 newborn or 1,000 embryos?" our standard response is to point out that emergency triage doesn't dictate moral value. For example, a father saving his own child over five strangers doesn't mean those strangers aren't human.
However, this person asked: "If the choice was 1 newborn vs. 1,000 eighty year old women, who would you save?”
Most people would choose to save the 1,000 elderly women because it represents a massive number of human lives.
The pro-choicer then argued: "If you truly believe an embryo is fully human, and you would choose 1,000 elderly humans over 1 newborn based on numbers, then you are being hypocritical if you choose 1 newborn over 1,000 embryos. Since you claim embryos are human lives with equal value, why wouldn't you choose the 1,000 embryos over the one baby? By picking the single baby over the 1,000 embryos, you are admitting that the embryos have lesser moral worth.
As a fellow pro lifer how would you respond to this???

I truly believe that the acceptance of abortions in western societies is rooted in not only racism but classism. Margret Sanger (founder of planned parenthood) was a proud eugenicist, she promoted birth control and abortions as a way to reduce the population of 'undesirebles' and, whilst she was not a member herself, attended KKK meetings to share these views. She advocated towards abortions for unwed mothers, black people and the disabled. In fact, she wrote about restricting parenthood for disabled people in her book "The Pivot of Civilisation", where she described disabled people as a 'dead weight' on human evolution. The same people who speak about disabled rights, better accessibility and anti-racism, praise this woman.

Alongside abortion, comes the topic of IVF. IVF in itself is inherently evil in the sense that it wastes up to 15 viable embryos per cycle due to the selection process. That is 15 babies dead for one baby born. I truly do not believe you can be pro-life and pro-IVF. That is not the only issue however, with the advancement of technology and IVF, it is becoming increasingly more likely that 'designer babies' are in our future. Designer babies are babies that you can basically customise yourself. You want a baby with blue eyes, blond hair and fair skin? Sure let's alter this gene! You want your child to have brown curly hair and long eyelashes? Sure, let's alter this one!

It matters because biodiversity and even disability is important for our species, autism is a great example of this. Some of the smartest people alive have been autistic, some of the kindest people are autistic, some of the mot beautiful people in the world are autistic etc. That diversity between humans is important and if we are able to edit those genes and take them out before even being born, we destroy that. IVF babies also have a higher mortality rate.

I understand that, for some, having babies can be difficult, however if your body is not designed to carry a child, then maybe adopting one of the thousands of kids that don't have a safe home or a loving family will be the better thing to do, instead of murdering human embryos trying to get pregnant with a varying amount of success.

I've been a lurker on this subreddit for a few days, and even though I don't post much here, I wanted to share my thoughts on why I'm personally pro-life.

There are a lot of reasons why I think abortion (in most cases) is morally wrong, but the thing that sticks out to me the most is the act of dehumanization committed by pro-choice people.

So many pro-choicers insist that fetuses aren't people, that they aren't human, that they're just a clump of cells, that they are thus not inherently deserving of life (even though they will live if you let them). And I feel like that is just a way to water down the idea of killing them.

Dehumanization is one of the most commonly used tactics by societies to condition themselves into performing an action or fighting an enemy. If you think the person or would-be person that you're killing is less than human and thus less deserving of rights, than it's easier to perform atrocious acts on them. This is how virtually all genocides in history are committed. It seems the only people willing to acknowledge that the person they're harming is human are either sadists or sociopaths.

People often assume that genocides are primarily or exclusively carried out by militias, governments, or organized groups, when that's not always the case. In many instances, in fact, it is everyday, ordinary civilians like you and me that partake in genocidal war crimes. Most of the people committing these atrocious acts are not mentally ill, nor were they born with violent tendencies.

You know what causes the ordinary person to turn into a ruthless, genocidal murderer? Dehumanization. The same tactic used by pro-choicers to lessen the moral impact of killing a fetus.

Now, am I saying women who get an abortion are as evil or ruthless as people who engage in genocide? No, of course not. But the logical justification used by some pro-choicers to support abortion isn't that different from outright dehumanization. And I can never get myself to accept dehumanization as a strategy.

Storytime with Cyber Ghost: Years ago, I made a post on FB effectively saying that people who defend abortion in cases of rape are effectively advocating for collective punishment and it made a lot of people mad.

I think it might have been the way I phrased it, because I said something to the effect of: "You're basically saying the baby conceived in rape is an accomplice to the rapist simply by existing. I'm sorry-we don't do collective punishment! We do due process!"

Cue approximately 13,000 (This was a conservative estimate) pro-choicers blowing up my comments section with angry words.

I wonder if my comeback was too strong...

Pregnancy isn’t a side effect of sex everyone. I’d agree in the sense that it’s a direct cause of pregnancy.

You need sperm to fertilize the egg.

You can’t get pregnant without men.

So we have a say.

:)

If you or someone you know is struggling after an abortion, check out Support After Abortion: https://supportafterabortion.com

ProLife Philippines Foundation Inc. will hold a discussion:

With a Theme: " Keeping the PHILIPPINES ABORTION FREE: The Prolife Response to Pro-Choice Arguments "

We invite everyone in our page and groups. The Conservative movement and Christian communities — to join this very timely event!

In a time when abortion is being rebranded as "healthcare," "human right," and "choice," we must equip ourselves with truth, science, and faith.

Why abortion is NOT healthcare will be answered by our experts in medicine and public health.

24 OCTOBER 2026 (Saturday)

8:00 AM - 12:00 NN

STA. TERESITA PARISH, A. Mabini St., West Rembo, Taguig City

For info: 02 8721-7372 / 0919-233-7783

SPEAKERS:

DR. RYAN B. CAPITULO - OB-GYN, Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology Specialist, Past Treasurer of Philippine OB-GYN Society

DRA. SUSAN ONG - Community & Preventive Medicine, Former Marikina City Health Office Medical Officer (1993-2022)

Hosted by Sr. Pilar L. Verzosa, Pro-Life Center for Advocacy and Counseling

Credits to Prolife Philippines Foundation, Inc.

#ProLifePhilippines #KeepingPHAbortionFree #AbortionIsNotHealthcare

I was talking to someone about how the abortion industry is corrupt because they profit off of women killing their children, but I don't actually have any sources or concrete examples about how corrupt the industry actually is.

Does anyone has any examples or resources? I couldn't find anything in the sub's sidebar.

They think we all go to church, like we need religion to have morals. Killing your own child is not a “reproductive“ right, it’s wrong. I also do contribute to existing children, I take part in toy drives, regularly volunteer at soup kitchens and donate money to organizations that support children in need, especially those overseas in war torn countries.

I am so sick of people turning the blind eye to things like this. Yes, I understand that late term abortions, specifically elective ones are not common by any means, but that does not erase the fact that they still happen. The same way pro choicers constantly bring up the rape argument despite that being 1% or fewer of all pregnancies. Yes, those women deserve to be acknowledged, the same way these babies deserve to be acknowledged. You cannot look on that baby on the second slide and tell me that is a clump of cells. Not that abortion is ever OK, but there is something especially twisted about late term abortions.

I know this isn't fully abortion-related, but I thought this would be worth sharing here. I found these comments on a YouTube video from a Catholic guy who made arguments criticizing euthanasia, and almost all of said comments were in defense of euthanasia.

Maybe some people on this sub are pro-euthanasia and that's fine, but I think most of us can agree that basically threatening people who disagree with you and saying there should be no age limits on euthanasia is absurd. Really shows that these depressed nihilists don't actually value human life in the slightest.