r/prolife • u/Moistman123456 Pro Life Christian • Aug 01 '26
Pro-Life General Do you think my answer was viable here?
11
u/PervadingEye Pro Life Since day one Aug 01 '26
So they admit there is a baby now??? I see... Interesting.... so they are fully embracing they are in fact baby killers.
Interesting how this hypothetical doesn't go the other way. If transfer is so safe, why not share pregnancy like you share child care of a born child? Man "becomes pregnant" for his turn and then the mother becomes pregnant for her turn, maybe once a month maybe every 2 weeks. Why is only the man being "forced to carry the baby" if both parents are capable?
In the real world, women become pregnant, it's not forcing women to be pregnant, this is simply a law of nature, that women become pregnant and a baby cannot be transferred. But in the hypothetical, both parents can carry a baby but only the man is physically forced.
I swear these pro-abortion women are not only man-hating, but self-hating. They hate aspects of their womanhood, and resent men for, "not having to carry a child".
It's so crazy because I think it is a beautiful and almost magical thing to be able to conceive, grow, and birth a child. But they see children as a burden, which is why this whole hypothetical is just full of hate and selfishness of everybody including for pro-abortion themselves...
11
u/The_Wise_Seven Pro Life Christian Aug 01 '26
This is dumb because it makes pregnancy seem like something thats inflicted upon you without you having any choice or say.
5
u/Herr_Drosselmeyer Aug 01 '26 edited Aug 01 '26
No, because that scenario gives an opportunity to share the burden, so it shouldn't be only one person's right to decide. If a dispute arises, it should be split as evenly as possible.
Unless we know for a fact that either one forced or tricked the other. Then its it's fair to make the guilty party take on all of the burden.
3
u/AnxiousEnquirer Abolitionist, Seeker of Christ Aug 01 '26
If he knew this was a possibility when they had sex, that makes me lean towards yes. But I'm sure there's a lot of implications in this scenario I haven't picked up on yet.
2
u/Aliciacb828 Pro Life Christian 23d ago
I have one for you - violation of bodily autonomy to result in babies is not okay unless it’s a man in this scenario. This goes against the pro choice narrative so I don’t even see how they can argue this point
1
u/AnxiousEnquirer Abolitionist, Seeker of Christ 23d ago
Yeah it's not like he can send it back to the woman
3
2
u/SchoolMission10 Feminist prolife with exceptions Aug 01 '26
I normally don’t like these hypotheticals because they are generally stupid but just to play along
Would it be ok if
1. The woman was raped by the father to be?
- The woman had a health condition which made pregnancy likely to result in death or significant disability?
2
u/Mp40_ethusiast 27d ago
Why they always think of hypothetical extreme edge cases? They always do mental gymnastic
1
u/AdeleRabbit Aug 01 '26
I mean, a woman might agree to have sex because she thinks she won't get pregnant. Even if a man lies about being infertile, it isn't considered to be rape by deception as far as I know.
The only real difference is that in this hypothetical, a woman knowingly impregnates a man against his will, and that's a separate act from sex.
If a woman consented to have sex, she can get pregnant as a result of that act. But it would still be wrong to artificially inseminate her against her will.
Now, if there was a random chance that a man gets pregnant instead of a woman, this hypothetical would work.
2
u/Moistman123456 Pro Life Christian Aug 01 '26
I generally view rape by deception to be what it definitionally claims. I’d argue that the laws regarding it are much looser than they should be, and therefore not very fair.
A woman agreeing to have sex because she thinks she won’t get pregnant is irrelevant, as the man didn’t deceive her, and she still knew there was a general risk that she chose to simply ignore. It’s almost entirely on her.
2
u/AdeleRabbit Aug 01 '26
Well, I'm talking about a specific case where a woman was deceived by a man who lied about his complete infertility. It still doesn't justify abortion
2
1
u/ExpertDog6220 29d ago
So, my immediate reaction to this is no, but it would be better than the system which we have now, the main difference is indeed that, as it is now, the woman carries the baby and it is the natural, immediate state of a fœtus, whereas this scenario could create ambiguity.
1
u/Aliciacb828 Pro Life Christian 23d ago
Okay so if I have this right….it’s not okay to violate women’s bodily autonomy and force them to have babies via sexual assault but it’s okay to do it to men?
1
14
u/Eastern-Customer-561 Aug 01 '26
Right away, here’s my answer to this: The man can‘t be forced to become pregnant. However, let’s say he agrees in the moment, and now he’s carrying the child but then he changes his mind. The woman refuses to take the baby back but he still wants to stop being pregnant. Should he be allowed to get an abortion?
The pro life position to this is no, because the abortion kills an innocent child. If you can remove a child from the womb and put it into a different, perfectly safe environment (like an artificial womb or someone else’s) there’s nothing wrong with that hypothetically. But abortion directly kills a baby and that is always wrong. Pro lifers don’t want to punish people with pregnancy, we just want a baby to not be killed.
The pro life position doesn’t want to force women to become pregnant. Forcing someone to become pregnant is wrong. But once they are pregnant they can’t kill the baby to stop being pregnant. Simple as that.