May 27, 2013

A Rebuttal To Ten Pro-Abortion Arguments


By Paula Glennon


I ran across a top ten list from a pro-abortion website that was being used by someone making comments on a pro-life article.  This inspired me to compose a rebuttal.  I’m afraid the American public has become complacent, undiscerning, and easily duped by what they read on social media and other internet sites.  I hope you will take the time to read and see what is being passed off as facts by our opposition, and what I have taken the time to research.  If you have time, please read some of the articles that are linked, to arm yourself with a more detailed understanding of the facts.  We must always be prepared to give a coherent reason for the pro-life stance that we take!  I know it’s a lot to read, but I hope you might learn something new.  Thanks for taking the time and making the effort!  It’s the least we can do to save babies, their mothers, and their families.

10. Laws against abortion do not stop abortion; they simply make it less safe. The number of women who get abortions does not change when it goes from being legal to illegal, or vice versa. The only thing that changes is more women die. Every year, 78,000 women die from unsafe abortions.

10. Making abortion illegal DEFINITELY makes abortion rarer. If it had been legal in 1958 my best friend probably would have been aborted in a heartbeat. And the people who would have encouraged her parents to do it, for economic and health reasons, would have thought that they were doing what was best for the other three children. Please tell that to her husband, and her two kids, and any children they will have down through the generations.

Where do you get your 78,000 figure for annual deaths due to illegal abortions? You should know that prior to his death, Bernard Nathanson admitted that they used completely ficticous numbers when they gave testimony for Roe v. Wade. "Repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public. The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 200-250 annually. The figure we constantly fed to the media was 10,000." I would argue that they aren't any more ethical now!  “A study published in the International Journal of Women’s Health determined that figures published by the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI) estimating the numbers of illegal abortions dwarf the actual figure of legal abortions tenfold. Likewise, researchers discovered that AGI purposefully includes women who died from ectopic pregnancies, miscarriage, and assault in their calculations of illegal abortion-related mortality. While the former could be dismissed as gross incompetence, the latter can only be explained as intentional deception. Actual figures have been reported since abortion was decriminalized in 2007 and discredit not only AGI estimates for illegal abortions and abortion-related mortality in Mexico, but in all countries where AGI applies their intentionally-flawed methodologies to create these bogus estimates.”    http://www.lifenews.com/2012/12/07/study-guttmacher-institute-inflates-illegal-abortion-deaths/   and http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/lies-damned-lies-and-statistics-from-the-alan-guttmacher-institute/

9. If people want to stop abortion, they should turn to methods that do work. These include comprehensive sex education and safe, affordable contraceptives. Unfortunately, as illogical as it sounds, the people who are most against abortion are also often most against these preventative measures. If they truly wanted to reduce the number of abortions that occur, they would embrace these methods.

9. We have more sex education, more free contraceptives, and more ways to contracept than at any other time in history. Why does the abortion rate stay the same? Because contraception only works as well as the user.  Even with perfect use no contraception is 100%. Contraception use increases promiscuity which, in turn, requires abortion to cover up/eliminate unwanted pregnancies. I would add that a contraception mentality (children are a burden) has contributed greatly to abortion and the devaluation of all life. 

“A 2011 Spanish study found that as use of contraceptive methods increased in a sample of more than 2000 Spanish women (49.1% to 79.9%), the rate of abortion in the group doubled in the same period.” 

“The researchers were clearly puzzled by the findings of their 10-year study, calling it 'interesting and paradoxical' that the large increase in elective abortions was associated with a remarkable increase in the number of women who used contraceptive methods. Research from the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute showed in 2011 that a majority of abortions took place in America after contraception failure: '54 percent of women who have abortions had used a contraceptive method [usually condom or the pill] during the month they became pregnant." ...

  “A 2012 Russian study found that while Russian women had the highest rate of contraceptive use when compared to surrounding countries, they also had the highest abortion rate. The researchers were clearly perplexed when they found “higher odds of modern contraception” led to a “higher level of abortion,” calling their findings 'contradictory, unexpected, and paradoxical.'"  
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/contraception-increases-abortions-heres-why/

8. The politicians “pro-lifers” so ardently support are only after one thing: self-interest. The majority of them are not “pro-life” because they agree with you; they are because they know you will continue to vote for them—and they know that making women remain pregnant not only takes away their power, but it also keeps them busy, in line, controlled, as well as a baking factory for their failing economy. The more people they have to rule over, the more they have to work and buy. Period.

8. Huh? The exact opposite is true! When you can trot a woman down to the nearest "clinic" and have her baby killed, then you are devaluing her and having power over her. Abortion is a soul-killing act. 64% of all women who abort state that they felt pressured into it. I have talked to many women who regret their abortions, but never have I met a woman who changed her mind who ever said she wished she had had one. What I hear instead is that they can’t imagine their lives without this child. Women are inherently in their nature nurturing.  Abortion completely goes against all that is natural for women. 

7. Religious ideology is no foundation for any law. Freedom of religion is guaranteed to any citizen in the United States; so why would the beliefs and values of one religion mandate actual laws for all citizens? It would be unfair, unjust and immoral. We do not have laws against eating fish, nor do we have laws that declare it is legal to sell one’s daughter, rape someone, or keep a person as a slave—all things that are promoted in religious text.

7. Opposing abortion can be done on a purely scientific basis. We know when life begins and that that life is fully human. Really the only question becomes, which lives are seen as having less value than others, therefore making it possible to kill them indiscriminately?

6. Reproductive restrictions do not end with abortion. Many people also argue that contraception itself is wrong—another mainly-religious philosophy—and will deny women the protection they need based on this belief. There are legislative acts that allow actual pharmacists to deny women their birth control because of their beliefs; does this not violate the Hippocratic Oath, especially if thousands of women are on birth control because their very lives depend on it (see #2)? Also, since it is my belief that men should not rape women, if I were a pharmacist, would I have a right to deny a man his Viagra just in case he uses it to rape? You never know.

6. Let me push my way through all this straw. Ever heard of the conscience clause? Everyone is more than welcome to go somewhere else to get the contraception they want. Pharmacists and doctors are required by law to refer people to other facilities where they can get the contraceptives/abortions they want.   Does The First Amendment, freedom to practice one's religion, sound at all familiar? I'm fine with someone not filling a Viagra prescription if that is against their conscience, but on the other hand my taxes pay for all kinds of contraception and abortion (New Mexico Medicaid). Viagra is used to treat a physical disease; fertility really isn't a disease. In very RARE instances birth control pills are used to PREVENT ovarian cancer, not treat or save a life.   Very, very rarely women will have a condition that requires them to avoid pregnancy.  I would argue that the modern method of Sympto-Theramal fertility awareness, with a 99% effective rate, is a viable alternative to artificial birth control.  It has the added benefit of people who use it experiencing a 1.5% divorce rate, as opposed to the overall national rate of 50%. http://www.ccli.org/nfp

5. Most people who are against abortion will never even become pregnant. If a law would never, in any circumstance, apply to a man, a man creating that law is preposterous. It is akin to men creating laws that ban women from voting, owning property, or showing skin in public—only much more deadly.

5. Again, you make an argument that presupposes that only pregnant women are involved in abortion. The baby is always killed, and 50% of the time that baby is a male. This is just a dumb argument. Of course, both men and women oppose abortion because it is the taking of a human life, and in doing so at the rate of 1.2 MILLION ANNUALLY, all other human life is devalued. We should all be concerned about that.

I have seen this argument used with increasing frequency lately.  I am guessing it’s yet another tactic to take the debate off of what really goes on during an abortion, and keep the debate in the realm of catchy sound bites.  Since the slogan “It’s a woman’s body” has been disproved by science (it’s a child’s body that gets destroyed), and the “It’s just a blob of tissue” has been completely obliterated by ever-improving ultrasounds, and finally, the “It doesn’t hurt anyone else” has pretty much played itself out on the evening news and is apparent in the total disregard for all human life in our society, I’m just assuming this is the next, and hopefully final, slogan to be trotted out.

4. Women who are raped or victims of incest should not be forced to carry out a pregnancy. Odds are that 1 in 3 women will be victims of sexual violence in her lifetime. Does this mean that 33% of all women should be forced to carry out a pregnancy from this violation? Considering how many people are killed during childbirth (see #2), should we allow this further risk to endured on top of what has already been done?

Many would argue that these women could endure the pregnancy, spending nearly a year of her life simply re-living the rape and its effects over and over again, to give up a baby at the end of it for adoption. However, we all are aware of the fact that there are millions of unwanted children awaiting adoption as we speak who remain unclaimed; in fact, UNICEF estimates that there are 210 million orphans in the world right now. If they have no one willing to be their parent or guardian, why would another baby have a better chance?

My theory is that people who spend so much time, energy, and money on anti-abortion campaigns should instead spend it on the precious children they say need saving so much—the ones who are alive and parentless. Imagine if all the funds spent on all those billboards and flyers and campaigns were instead either spent adopting or donating to places that are overrun with orphaned children… perhaps some actual credibility would be given to these people who claim to love children so much.

Also, there is the fact of the matter of the more than one million homeless youth in America alone. The number one factor for a child being homeless is physical or sexual abuse at home. Perhaps these “child-lovers” should step in and care for these already-born children as well.


4. Where to begin... Abortions due to rape or incest account for about 1.5% of all abortions. You are advocating for the 98.5% due to the 1.5%?   Also, in the largest study ever done of women who became pregnant due to rape (it really is rare, it’s not 33% of women by any means) 69% chose not to abort. Of those women 0% regretted their decision! Of the 29% who did abort, 80% reported that abortion had been the wrong solution.

Readily available abortion often actually enables incest.  “The case against abortion for incest pregnancies is even stronger. Studies show that incest victims rarely ever voluntarily agree to abortion. Instead of viewing the pregnancy as unwanted, the incest victim is more likely to see the pregnancy as a way out of the incestuous relationship because the birth of her child will expose the sexual activity.” ...  “Abortion businesses who routinely ignore this evidence and neglect to interview minors presented for abortion for signs of coercion or incest are actually contributing to the victimization of young girls.” ...  “For example, the parents of three teenaged Baltimore girls pleaded guilty to three counts of first-degree rape and child sexual abuse. The father had repeatedly raped the three girls over a period of at least nine years, and the rapes were covered up by at least ten abortions.” ... “According to court documents, all the abortions were performed over a nine-year period at the Greater Baltimore Medical Center by the same doctor, Dr. Julio C. Novoa. He could not be reached for comment late yesterday.”

I don't know a single pro-life person that doesn't also donate to other causes, be it adoption, foster care, food banks, material goods for mothers and all their children, etc. We are a very generous bunch, and there is nothing in this for us materially.  In fact, we are poorer (materially) due to our helping. Abortionists, on the other hand rake in LOTS of money. When you say things like this you use exactly the same arguments as Southern plantation owners did against Abolitionists. They argued that if slavery was abolished, every one who supported abolition should be required to give former slaves a job and supply them with housing. Of course, that didn't happen, but I don't think anyone would argue that fighting for and succeeding in abolishing slavery wasn't the best and only thing that could be done at that time in our nation's history - we are at just such a crossroads now! 

As for adoption, in the U.S. there are currently 36 couples waiting for every 1 baby put up for adoption. The statistics you quote are worldwide where many of those babies who are abandoned become so due to their sex (do we really care about the baby women?) or the majority due to physical defects. They are unfortunate to be born into societies that don't value girls, or where medical and personal resources are lacking. Again, I know a (very pro-life) family who has adopted FOUR children from overseas, all of whom have cerebral palsy that ranges from mild to severe. They didn't have to do that to be able to speak out against abortion; however, they have the resources and are generous enough to do so, to the immense benefit of those 4 children. 

3. Reproductive choice can be the only thing that stands between a woman and poverty. There is a reason that the 1 billion poorest people on the planet are female. In sub-Saharan Africa and west Asia, women typically have five to six children, which leaves them powerless to provide for not only their own families, but themselves.

3. Poverty is greatly exacerbated by corrupt governments, environmental disasters, wars, etc. The majority of poverty worldwide is not due to the lack of abortion.  Moral poverty, that's another subject, which enables people to be treated as goods and not with any inherent worth, I would argue that that is the main cause of worldwide poverty.

In your example of the mother with 5 or 6 children, if she gets pregnant and can’t afford another mouth to feed, and she has a 2-year-old with physical disabilities or a long term illness, how about killing that one, who will obviously cost her more in effort and resources, and opt to let the unborn one live?  If all we are talking about is alleviating poverty, and no religion or any of that silly moral stuff should come into play, what possible reason can you give to spare the two-year-old and take the unborn child’s life instead? 

Many argue that abortion actually keeps women from getting the assistance they need:  it masks the inequality that exists in the workplace, it masks abuse and neglect, and it keeps women from seeking the resources that would help them to get out of poverty. We offer GED training, parenting classes, help in finding community resources, help in reconciling with estranged family, and/or leaving abusive relationships, and we offer immediate material support and assist with job hunting for both parents, if needed. 

2. Reproductive choice can be the only thing that stands between a woman and DEATH. Women who face deadly consequences of a pregnancy deserve to choose to live. Teen girls, whose bodies are not yet ready for childbirth, are five times more likely to die. Not only do 70,000 girls ages 15-19 die each year from pregnancy and childbirth, but the babies that do survive have a 60% higher chance of dying as well.

During my own pregnancy—which had been unexpected though joyful up to this point—I was horrified to learn that I had preeclampsia only 25 weeks in. While they were able to save both my daughter and me, she was born at 1 pound, three months premature, and was a medical miracle. Most babies at that weight do not survive; and if they do, they suffer severe complications—as do the mothers, including myself. I was then informed that my risk of it happening all over again was extremely high, and that if there were a next time I may not be so lucky. I am fortunate to have access to birth control, but many women—especially young ones—do not. Preeclampsia alone affects 10 to 15% of all women! There are hundreds of other complications that arise besides preeclampsia that can, and will, result in death as well.

2. "The death of a woman during pregnancy, at delivery, or soon after delivery is a tragedy for her family and for society as a whole. Sadly, about 650 women die each year in the United States as a result of pregnancy or delivery complications."  
http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/MaternalInfantHealth/Pregnancy-relatedMortality.htm
Really, you have to question and research everything you cut and paste from internet sources! I'm thinking the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) have a lot less to gain from lying about pregnancy and delivery deaths than the industry that makes a HUGE profit off of keeping women ignorant and scared, enabling them to convince them to kill their unborn children more easily.

If the U.S. has approximately 6% of the world’s population, and the U.S. has 650 maternal deaths every year (and we’re told that we are actually on the high end of worldwide maternal death rates), how in the world can you possibly get a number like 70,000 annual deaths of 15-19 year-olds alone?  (Hint:  take 650 divided by .06 and you get 10,833.)  You must be using Guttmacher mathematics! (See #10)  I would argue that maternal deaths in third world countries, where the highest rates exist, are exacerbated by lack of proper medical facilities, absence of emergency medical care, and the prevalence of unsanitary conditions.  Increasing abortions for women under these circumstances will not change the danger they encounter.  Instead, the U.S. government and others should insure that the billions of dollars in aid being sent to these countries are being used to address these fundamental problems, and not being siphoned off by corrupt officials or being used to purchase weapons or conduct wars and genocides.  Killing poor people to alleviate their suffering just makes absolutely no sense!  (See #3.)

Speaking of teenagers and their bodies not being prepared for something, your risk of breast cancer increases by at least 50% if you have an induced abortion before your first full-term pregnancy.  Until you have reached 32-weeks gestation, your breast tissue is in a state that makes it more susceptible to cancer cells developing.  An induced abortion leaves a young woman with much more breast tissue that is not cancer resistant like milk producing cells.  “1) Women under the age of 18 or over the age of 29 who obtained induced abortions have more than a twofold increase in risk.” 
Twofold, that’s 100%; a family history carries only an 80% increased risk.  Consider the recent increase of breast cancer, especially in younger women; it used to be something you saw only in women over 50. 

1. Doctors, not governments, should always be the people to make medical recommendations and opinions. Would you allow the government to tell you if you could have a kidney transplant or a blood transfusion? Of course not. The fact that we even consider, let alone allow, governments to regulate a medical procedure is both illogical and foolish.

1. DOCTORS Kermit Gosnell, Leroy Carhart, Nicole Riley.  Need I say more? Well, actually I will: tattoo parlors, hair and nail salons, restaurants, bakeries, hell, even street food vendors have to abide by certain regulations and submit to periodic inspections. You think that facilities that perform surgeries as invasive as abortion should at least be held to the same standards as say the veterinarian clinic that you take your cat or dog or ferret to? Well, currently in most states they aren't. Do you know why? Because those organizations who are SO concerned about women's welfare (and who make HUGE profits from doing abortions on the cheap) fight such common sense regulations with piles of money and hours of human effort!   


Please, take time to do your research, and if possible, find women who have actually gone through the horror and the aftermath of abortion and find out the truth about it first hand. Women like us have nothing to gain by putting ourselves out there; we don't do it for profit, we do it to help other women from making the same mistake we did, which once done can never be undone.  And, we do it to save the lives of innocent children who are being slaughtered.  More developed babies are being given fatal heart attacks, smaller ones are being torn apart and pulled out in pieces, and the smallest ones are being crushed and mangled as they are sucked out through tubes.  This butchery happens at a rate of 3,288 per day, in the U.S. alone.  This is the single issue, superseded only by our call to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ, that we should be using our time, talent, and treasure to expose and end!     
                                                                                                                      
Paula Glennon

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

BRAVO, my friend.

cary said...

Excellent and well done. In this "sound bite culture" the only thing I'd recommend is shortening both the pro-choice and pro-life statements/arguements. If you could shorten it enough you could do a pamphlet. It could be a wonderful thing to hand out at PP clinics. I'm available to help.

Cary
facebook.com/events/368833189905109