Archive for December, 2009|Monthly archive page

Pro-life is pro-women

A week ago I got an email from a Wheaton student working on a research paper on the state of feminism at Wheaton.  She asked for my perspective on feminism in relation to the pro-life movement.  Here is my response, though there is more that could be said:

I’m far from being a feminist, but my belief that men and women are equal in dignity in value (and complementary in roles, but that’s an aside) is a strong defense for my pro-life position.  Feminists who taut abortion as a basic right and a service to women are horribly self-deceived.  In truth, it is the pro-life movement that is pro-women.  It is pro-lifers who are standing behind women in crisis situations providing “free pregnancy tests, ultrasounds, counseling, support groups, childcare classes, financial management education, babysitting, diapers, children’s clothes, and housing.”*

Abortion has terrible consequences for a woman’s life.  Besides the emotional, psychological, relational effects, it can have serious physical consequences.  Women who have had abortions are at least 50 percent as likely to develop breast cancer.  Abortion also increases rates of placenta previa and pelvic inflammatory disease.  For women who are able to conceive after having had an abortion, the chances of a preterm birth, malformations in later children, early death for infants, and even maternal suicide are higher because of their previous abortion.

Abortionists are not warning women of these risks.  In fact, pro-choice groups try to prevent efforts to make it mandatory that women be made aware of the risks of the abortion as they would be for any other surgery.  And they claim that they are pro-women.

But not only is abortion terribly damaging to women, it encourages selfishness and irresponsibility in males.  According to polls, the highest pro-abortion category in the US is white males between the ages of 20 and 45.  It doesn’t take a genius to figure out why that is.  Overall, more women support the unborn’s right to life than men.

Historically, until the 1970s, it was the women’s movement that spoke out against abortion.  Susan B Anthony said, “I deplore the horrible crime of child murder.”  On the other side, Margaret Sanger championed abortion as an enabler of eugenics.  It is a little known fact that her organization went underground and came back renamed as the Planned Parenthood Federation.

It is a tragic irony that abortionists who promote their work as defending women’s rights, are denying the basic right to life of thousands of unborn female babies.  In the USA, about half of abortions result in the death of a baby girl, but outside the US it is a staggeringly higher percentage.  In China, because of mandated abortion and sex-selection, two thirds of children born there are males.

Abortion is insulting to women because underlying it is the assumption that women are unable to fully participate in and contribute to society by their nature and biology.  It belittles the unique, important privilege and responsibility women have in bearing children.

* Alcorn, 20
Why Pro-Life: Caring for the Unborn and their Mothers” Randy Alcorn
Eternal Perspective Ministries, USA, 2004


Begging the question

(Much of this post is drawn from The Case for Life chapter one, again.)

At the risk of being redundant, here is another post regarding the unborn as human beings.  Behind many arguments for abortion is a logical fallacy called “begging the question.”  “Begging the question” is assuming what you are attempting to prove – it does not mean “to raise the question.”

Note that fallacy in these arguments against the pro-life position:

“If you don’t like abortions, don’t have one.  It isn’t your place to judge someone else’s decision.  Don’t force your views on her.”

“Abortion is a personal decision, so the government shouldn’t get involved.”

“No one should have to bring an unwanted child into the world.  Who’s taking care of the abused and abandoned kids already out there?”

“Legalized abortion is better than back-alley abortions.”

Each one of these objections assumes that the unborn are not human.  Try trotting out the toddler.  No one would be tolerant if you said you had decided to kill two-year olds.  No one would hold the second position if the topic in question were child abuse.   And with regard to the third objection, isn’t murder the worst kind of child abuse?  Arguing for legalized abortion on the grounds that back-alley abortions are dangerous is like saying “Since some people will die attempting to kill others, the state should make it legal for them, so it is safer for them.”

I hope you see again how important it is to simplify the debate by focusing it on the question “what is the unborn?”

The misuse of the phrase “begs the question” is one of my pet peeves, so I’ve included this little card for your amusement / edification / instruction.    😉