Skip to content
Home » News » Countering Pro-Abortion Arguments 24

Countering Pro-Abortion Arguments 24

Pro-lifers don’t care about children after they are born.

  • This assertion is absolutely untrue. Pro-lifers show deep concern for mothers and their babies before and after birth. There are over 1500 crisis pregnancy centers in the U.S, a figure roughly double the number of abortuaries. An estimated 30,000 women are living in the homes of pro-lifers. In addition to individual households, there are many homes for unwed mothers run by pro-lifers. The operation of pro-life centers and homes is made possible by caring and compassionate volunteers. Commonly, pregnant women are taught child rearing as well as vocational skills.
  • Compare this with Planned Parenthood, the world’s largest provider of abortion and “family planning” services. They teach women only one thing: how not to have children (and if that fails, how to get rid of one’s “mistake”). Planned Parenthood has an annual budget of well over 300 million dollars. With this huge, government-subsidized, taxpayer-funded budget, guess how many homes they run? None! When it comes to “family planning,” having a family seems to be the one thing that Planned Parenthood doesn’t plan for!
  • It is the pro-abortion cartel that doesn’t care about children after they are born, nor the woman who chooses life for her baby. Every woman who chooses to let her baby live has rejected the only thing that pro-aborts offer: Death. And despite the “choicespeak” of a child before birth being a potential person, he or she is truly a potential source of revenue for the abortionist. Perhaps in this morbid sense, pro-abortionists “care” more about children before birth than after: “Once born, never to be aborted!”
  • Pro-lifers have always extended their time, energy, resources and compassion to help unwed or poor mothers in need of support. These efforts do not suddenly disappear when a baby is born. Examine where much of today’s charity money comes from. Very little comes from “pro-choice” organizations.
  • Unlike pro-lifers, pro-abortionists have a hard time justifying the birth of children in less than ideal circumstances. If a woman is poor and unable to feed her child, the “problem” could have been eliminated before birth, they reason. A starving child should never have been born, they say. The pro-abortionist is not merely “pro-choice”; abortion in many cases is the “promoted-choice.” Is it any surprise then that despite the great financial resources of the pro-abortion industry, it does virtually nothing to help those poor mothers who nonetheless choose life for their babies?
  • Whenever a pro-abortionist laments about the suffering of children and how it should be avoided, we must clarify their “solution”: death NOW for the potential suffering of a child. The pro-lifer sees a child with a problem; the pro-abortionist sees the child as a problem.