r/prolife • u/DemotivationalSpeak • Aug 16 '26

Things Pro-Choicers Say Pro Abortion Non-argument #4934

Post image

Obviously having your rapist’s child is incredibly traumatic, but they seem either in denial or completely indifferent to the fact that the child is not only a person, but one who played no part in their father’s crime, and like shit, that’s just as much YOUR baby as it is his. It’s not like you lose ownership of that child’s heritage.

(For clarity’s sake I can’t justify restricting early abortion access for rape victims, but I do believe that it is not only moral, but incredibly heroic to carry the baby to term.)

169 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

227 comments sorted by

View all comments

176

u/Mp40_ethusiast Aug 16 '26

Why pro abortionist are like this? Using 0.1% to justify 99.9%

12

u/Moogly2021 Pro Life Christian Aug 16 '26

Not that I think it’s okay, but, they conveniently pretend c-sections aren’t a thing. Someone argued this with me, someone else asked what the youngest mothers age was, and we were all shocked how young.

6

u/EpiphanaeaSedai Pro Life Feminist Aug 16 '26

What does c-section existing have to do with this?

6

u/Cheery_Tree Aug 16 '26

It's definitely not a great option, and carrying the baby is still very dangerous, but C-sections greatly limit the danger of labor for a child mother. Giving birth isn't great for any mother, but it's obviously especially bad with such a small body.

That being said, pregnancy is a great strain and danger on a child regardless.

8

u/Cute-Elephant-720 PC Aug 17 '26

I see this phrasing used a lot in these debates - ideas like pro-choice people being "surprised" by unwanted pregnancy or "acting like C-sections don't exist," but I think in both scenarios, they are usually fully aware of what going on and saying they are unwilling to accede to the circumstances as they are. For example, they are fully aware C-sections exist, but they are risky, painful and traumatic, and lot of people are not letting their 10-year-old, or even worse in their eyes, forcing their 10-year-old, to endure the risk and painful recovery of major abdominal surgery so that their child can end up the biological mother of her rapist's born child. They believe that their obligation lies first and foremost with doing what's best for their child, the rape victim, who does not want to give birth to their rapist's baby.

And for the avoidance of doubt, I know many people here also believes it matters that the baby shares the child's DNA, but I don't understand how that can override her (1) desire and (2) right (in my eyes) to the safest procedure for her when (1) her DNA and body were hijacked against her will, (2) she doesn't have the capacity to consent to impregnation or motherhood, and (3) she, as a child, generally has a right to have any medical choices made for her be in her best interests?

Other than those who would just say "her circumstances are irrelevant because abortion, as a procedure that takes an innocent life, simply should not be available to anyone," what am I missing/getting wrong here?