Abortion News & Commentary

Abortion Activists Can’t Explain When Life Begins, and They Don’t Care

"A tabulation of data from surveys conducted between 1996 and 2020 of women who had abortions found that '96.50% of all abortions are performed for social or economic reasons,' and not for extreme reasons like rape or preserving a mother’s life."

With the likelihood that Roe v Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court decision which dubiously declared abortion to be a constitutional right, will be overturned, the Left have another cause to keep them perpetually irate, which they will use to justify violence and intimidation in American cities (in the name of social justice, of course).

Abortion supporters claim that the overturning of Roe v Wade sets women back fifty years and that conservatives are only pro-life because they’re patriarchal sexists (including pro-life women, somehow) who want to control women’s bodies and choices. If you venture into the cesspool that is Leftist Twitter, you’ll see absurd claims, with thousands of likes, such as conservatives don’t believe that foetuses are human beings, because they don’t fuss about miscarriages.

Nobody opposes abortion because they wish to control women’s bodies, but because of the scientific and philosophical belief that an unborn child is a human being, and therefore deserving of life, no matter what. A person is a person whether they are inside or outside the womb.

Abortion activists claim that their “right” to abortion is being withheld from them because of the religious beliefs of others, but you don’t have to be religious to understand that life begins at conception. The renowned atheist Christopher Hitchens was (rather sarcastically) asked if he was a part of the pro-life movement, and he replied:

“I believe that the concept unborn child is a real concept… I’ve had a lot of quarrels with my fellow materialists and secularists on this point. I think that if the concept ‘child’ means anything, the concept unborn child can be certain to mean something, and actually, all the discoveries of embryology, which have been considerable in the last generation or so, and of viability, appear to confirm that opinion… I think it should be innate in everybody. It’s innate in the hypocritic oath. It’s instinct in anyone who’s ever watched a sonogram and so forth. So, yes is my answer.”

As a practising Catholic, I couldn’t have said it better.

Abortion supporters know that they can’t explain when human life begins, so instead, they focus on a woman’s “right to choose” and bodily autonomy. They don’t care whether life begins at conception or not, they just want to have as much sex as they like and pretend that they can dismiss the consequences. The fact that unborn children are people deserving of life is simply an inconvenience to them. They ignore pro-life arguments altogether and assert that they are morally superior to anyone who doesn’t recognise their “rights” (which Leftists do regarding virtually every issue). They use deceptive language to conceal what abortion really is: “reproductive rights”, “pro-choice”, “access to safe abortions”, and so on. It’s a standard-issue Leftist tactic to reframe the discussion on their warped terms rather than address the issues honestly.

Objections to the pro-life position like “what if a child is conceived in rape?” and “what if the woman’s life is in danger” (Funny how we’re able to define “woman” again) are eclipsed by the fundamental question: When does life begin? If they do try to answer this question, their argument quickly falls apart because they have no criteria beyond their subjective preferences.

This is not to dismiss such objections carelessly, although it’s clear that most abortions occur because promiscuous women and their sexual partners don’t want to face the consequences of their poor decisions. A tabulation of data from surveys conducted between 1996 and 2020 of women who had abortions found that “96.50% of all abortions are performed for social or economic reasons,” and not for extreme reasons like rape or preserving a mother’s life.

Sex creates children. That is its purpose. Nobody has the “right” to thwart that fact of nature, especially after the fact of conception.

It’s worth noting that the same people now proclaiming, “my body, my choice,” and voicing their dismay over the government supposedly telling them which medical decisions they can or can’t make are generally the same people who declared that people who refused the potentially lethal COVID-19 injections should be excluded from society. Such people’s obviously contradictory beliefs are dictated to them by Leftist media outlets and loudmouths on social media. Their worldviews are formed by their own selfish desires and the Cultural-Marxist propaganda which affirms them. Don’t get dragged into explaining why you’re not a sexist if you don’t support abortion. They can’t explain when life begins, and that’s the reason they go on about rights. They are suppressing the truth in unrighteousness, to use St. Paul’s phrase.

The termination of Roe v Wade is undoubtedly a step in the right direction for America, but we must remember that abortion is the rotten fruit of a worldview that must be dismantled – feminism, which, for decades, has convinced women that sexual promiscuity and killing their own children is liberating and that the protections and blessings of marriage and motherhood are shackles which must be broken. Nothing is more anti-woman than feminism.  

Abortion is only convenient for women who enjoy being sexually exploited by men, and for men who have no interest in raising their children should they impregnate a woman. That’s it. That’s the purpose abortion serves – allowing people to have supposedly consequence-free sex by brutally extinguishing the life it creates. But sex isn’t consequence-free.

If Roe v Wade is overturned then this basic truth, along with the truth that unborn children are human beings, will have been defended in American society.

Hopefully, this will have a ripple effect of inspiring conservatives to oppose abortion and feminism throughout the West, despite the senseless outrage it will generate. Contrary to those arguing that women are being set back fifty years, that would be real progress.