Life Chat: Are pro-lifers pro forced birth?

Hello, Roland Warren here. A common argument pro-life people hear is
that we are not actually pro-life, but pro-control or pro-forced birth. I was personally confronted with this argument
recently in an online forum. A commenter on one of my blog posts wrote
to me, “If you believe you have the right to tell a woman when she can control her body,
then you are not pro-life, but pro-control… And as soon as you can die from a pregnancy,
then you can have equal rights. Wow. In response, I could have tried to convince
her that I am not pro-control. Instead, I turned the question around on her
to see if her objections to control and her support for equality were consistent. So I asked her, “Should a man be forced
by the state to pay child support for a child that he did not want prior to birth? If so, why?” Sensing a logical conundrum, the commenter
actually said that she was against child support. But her reasoning is where her real inconsistency
starts to appear. She said that if a man uses birth control,
supports the use of birth control among women, and supports abortion, then he should not
have to pay child support for a child he did not want. So I asked her if this logic applied to women
and abortion. After all, she said she was for equality and
does not think anyone should be forced to be a parent. So, if a man has the right to financially
“abort” a child that he didn’t want, then it follows that he does not have the
right to financially abort when he does not take steps to avoid pregnancy. So, if a woman does not use birth control,
and then she gets pregnant, to be consistent with men, shouldn’t she be denied the right
to an abortion, too? Again, if men should bear the full responsibility
for pregnancies in which they fail to take the available steps to avoid them, then women
should also have to bear the full responsibility for pregnancies in which they fail to take
the available steps to avoid them. In other words, there are cases in which women
should “lose the right to an abortion.” Well, of course our commenter did not agree
with this. Frankly, her next response was confusing and
incoherent, and she started insulting me. The reality is that she is not really against
child support. She felt like she had to say she is, and then
attach a bunch of unenforceable criteria on whether or not a man would be required to
pay it. So, she is for child support, and she is for
abortion. These are not logically consistent positions
that promote equality between the sexes. The logically consistent position, and the
one I personally take, is that I am against abortion and in favor of child support. Why? Because both of those perspectives assume
that people – men and women – should take on the full responsibilities for the unborn
children before and after birth since life begins at conception. The reason our commenter was unable to see
this distinction is that she has a distorted understanding of how equality actually works. She believes that equal rights are dependent
on equal experiences. Only if two people can experience the same
thing in the same way, can they have equal rights. This type of perspective can lead to troubling
consequences. In fact, this is the same type of logic that
was used to deny black people equal rights via slavery and Jim Crow laws. Since black people were different genetically
and socially and had different life experiences, they were denied equal rights. . This is also why her argument about death
fails logically. She argues that since men can’t die in pregnancy,
they should not have any say about abortion.. But think of the military. Men are much more likely to die in combat
than women. So, should we revoke the ranks of all the
women who have become high ranking officers, and thereby send men to face death in battle
because they did not face the same “risk of death” as the men? Of course not. Just because women and men have different
experiences when it comes to military services, it does not change whether or not they have
equal rights and agency in the military. When it comes to abortion, women give birth
and men don’t. But, they both give life, in the sense that
they equally contribute at conception, when life begins. So, the way their equal rights plays out looks
different… but they are still equal in the minds of logical people. Men should pay child support and women should
carry to term. Neither of them should be able to “abort”
their responsibilities to the life that they equally created. . And that is the pro abundant life position. I shared this with you because it is often
difficult to answer challenges to our position. I could have gotten into an argument about
whether or not I am in favor of controlling women, or what it means to be pro-forced birth. Instead, I simply asked someone to be consistent
with their own view, which revealed the inconsistencies in her stated reasoning about her support
of abortion. The commenter was trying to create a smoke
screen to justify her support of abortion by concealing it in emotionally and politically
charged terms of control and equality. But my simple questioning revealed that she
was in fact the one who did not support real equality between men and women when it comes
to choices around pregnancy; she had no problem with the government forcing men to be parents. Until next time, may God bless you daily as
you serve him faithfully. Amen.

3 Replies to “Life Chat: Are pro-lifers pro forced birth?”

  1. Wow.. congrats… your use of false equivalency was very stealthily..

    And the your “equal rights dependent upon equal experience” is very nicely misleading… replace experience with affectation

    Having to bear a child is personal and intimate. It is not about “equality” of the sexes…

    By the by.. after all you have forced birth is the aim of your doctrine, is it not?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *