As expected, those who have a moral compass that sees murdering their child as a mere inconvenience to an otherwise normal day have been up in arms since the Texas Heartbeat Act commenced on 1st September 2021. The decision many have described as being “made by men to control women” (who tend to have little to say about the all-male Supreme Court board that passed Roe in 1973, or the female Texan representative, Shelby Slawson, that introduced the bill in March of this year to Austin’s House of Representatives), has led to even shoddier points being thrown up over the last week by leftists trying to franticly justify their fawning over baby murder. When looking at the “justifications” from suburban goth girls or even Jen Psaki, it’s needless to say that not a single word uttered by any of them could even remotely be used to justify the extermination of the unborn; instead, they showed the ease to which anyone can debunk emotion based liberal myths with hard facts.
"It's just a clump of cells"
To start there’s the classic, whined by teenage girls in dark makeup tucked away in the corners of their rooms nationwide. Astoundingly, they’re correct. An unborn baby is just a clump of cells. Of course, what they fail to realise here is in fact that they too are just a clump of cells, albeit carrying a few more pounds (likely in metal hanging from their faces). Factually, any life is cellular, whether plant, animal, bacterial, or fungal, so, whilst of course no pro-lifer is out protesting for the emancipation of the fungus, the point made by the left here is already inept. Being a clump of cells does not discount the value of anything.
To stop them launching the “well clearly you aren’t pro all life” point, it’s necessary to then look to see why the baby is any different to the adult, the cow, or in fact the aforementioned fungus. Simply, the baby is a human. By definition, a human being is “any individual of the genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens”. Any individual with the genus Homo means that the “individual” must be unique, and of human species, two boxes ticked at the point of conception when a zygote is formed with its own set of DNA different to anyone on earth. So, leftists, not only is a foetus a human being, but also an embryo, a point bolstered by Dr C W Kischer of the Arizona School of Medicine’s affirmation that “every human embryologist, worldwide, states that the life of the new individual human being begins at fertilization”. A foetus then is a clump of cells. A clump of cells with a destiny to chase, much like the destinies of Esau and Jacob, already written by the Lord when they were still in the womb of Rebekah (Genesis 25:23). So, libs, it seems nobody is too young for a future of identity with full personhood in the eyes of God or of science.
“More women will die from “back alley” abortions”
Quoting from a study by Christopher Tietze, between 1940 and 1950 in the US, the maternal death rate as a result of abortion was in fact lower than in European nations like Denmark, who had legalised abortion before 1940, with the latter seeing 195 deaths per 100,000 legal procedures, a figure peaking above the US’s 165 per 100,000 illegal procedures in the same time frame.
Yet again, facts trump emotional reactions and high-octane left-wing accusations, proving that saving the lives of babies has never ended those of the women bearing them, with transatlantic numbers showing quite the opposite.
“But what about women who have been raped?”
When visualised, “but what about rape” can be seen to be the largest fallacy of overwhelming exceptionalism possible. The Guttmacher Institute puts the number of abortions carried out with the primary reason being that the victim was raped at less than 0.5%, with the largest category at 25% being, upsettingly, “not ready for a child”. Liberals seem to also forget that not every traumatised mother will choose to condemn her child to death, with many women opting to “conquer the rape” by holding on to their child, wishing to prevent another unnecessary act of violence against an innocent being. For too long pro-choice has been the side of the feminist, but when women decide to “conquer rape”, to say they are a poor asset to feminism would rightfully leave a sour taste in their mouths.
Also, as much as socialists like to tout their “positive” world view, it’s undeniable that darkness exists even beyond rape in the world, seen citing the case of the Texas girl in 2011 who, when raped by her 19-year-old brother, was ferried to a clinic to cover up her brother’s heinous crimes as her baby, and credibility in a trial, was wiped from the earth. In the worst-case scenarios, the clinics even orchestrate the coverups knowingly, a practise exposed when Project Veritas sent Lila Rose into a Planned Parenthood office in California where she posed as a 15-year-old girl impregnated by a 23-year-old man. Was a statutory rape offense reported? Well, one can easily assume that answer.
“The Bible encourages abortion”
Laughable at best, such an entry had to feature itself here. Not only is such an argument the only time heathenistic socialists can bring themselves to say “Bible” without vomiting, but it also shows perfectly the time they’ve spent reading the Word. No time at all.
The plethora of passages used to demonstrate how “the Bible encourages abortion”, paired with the tiniest ounce of theological knowledge, clearly do not insinuate God’s support of tax breaks for Planned Parenthood.
Do the liberals tend to believe in the creation of Adam and Eve from dust into humanity? No. However, flocking to the creation story to tell pro-life Christians how to live out their callings seems to be a formality for them, as in their minds Genesis 2:7 (Then the Lord God formed the man out of the dust from the ground and breathed the breath of life into his nostrils, and the man became a living being) shows that it is only once the cord is cut and a baby takes its first breath that it is in fact a valued human being. There is, as with everything covered in this piece, a large flaw to this excuse for harvesting children, namely that Adam was not conceived like aborted foetuses, instead created from the world by God’s right hand. Of course Adam wasn’t living until his first breath! Unlike a human embryo, he was immaterial, making he and his wife the only exceptions to when life starts in humanity’s long history under the Lord.
Moving away from the more light hearted corners of the Word to further demonise the ‘archaic faith groups’, we see the classic old testament barbarity so common in the depths of the ancient Bible, with a “purity test” denoted so clearly in Numbers 5:27-28 (When he makes her drink the water, if she has defiled herself and been unfaithful to her husband, the water that brings a curse will enter her to cause bitter suffering; her belly will swell, and her womb will shrivel. She will become a curse among her people. But if the woman has not defiled herself and is pure, she will be unaffected and will be able to conceive children), holding the goal of identifying a wife’s integrity amid accusations of adultery with divine aid. Many holding a pro-choice position paint an image that the excerpt violently denotes an induced miscarriage of a woman’s baby by Clergymen, however nowhere in the passage is pregnancy mentioned at all. Instead, the closest thing to liberal bate in the verses, the shrivelling of the womb, simply denotes an all too frequent occurrence for many women, the cramping of muscles around the womb.
It’s always seemed that the life advocates have had the weaker arguments, smaller base, and dirtier image, but now is time that all who have had their view of those who support the unborn marred by external influences or personal interactions mingle with members of the pro-life community. As a collective pro-lifers need to tidy their arguments, carry themselves well, use facts to trump more emotional liberal arguments, hold genuine motives, rehearse their rebuttals, and spread their message as far and wide as they can. Abortion evangelism is now necessary to protect the unborn, a necessity which has proven itself in Texas with their recent tightening of abortion regulations. It is no longer a dead and minority cause, and through the community polishing and rehearsing the more moral side of the debate, pro-life can be the default again in the West, and the anointed generations of the future can rejoice. It’s time to show the black lipstick teenagers and pre-abortive mothers that pro-life is in fact pro-freedom, pro-freedom for the 860,000 Americans who each year will never be seen as citizens. It’s pro-life, not pro-control.