I had an argument on Facebook about this issue when someone said, “keep your religion in your pants,” and it dawned on me: people actually believe pro-life views are primarily religious.
I had never thought of it that way before I saw that comment, so I decided to respond to it. After a few back and forths, the guy stopped commenting. It won’t be shocking to note that he got more positive reactions from people than I did since the post was on a pro-choice platform.
My argument was simple: Pro-life people believe they’re fighting for life; this is not a religious thing. There has never been anyone on earth who believed that fighting for a person’s fundamental rights to life is an exclusively religious thing or even came from a primarily religious place. It is commonsense.
I also argued that the denial by pro-choice rhetorics about the real motive behind all these is appalling and creates more division. They’re (pro-choice people) usually more closed-off, confrontational and aggressive, and more likely to get violent. All because of the pro-choice rhetoric, religious people are dictating to women how to care for their own bodies. By religious people, I mean “religious men.”
And this is a shamefully low blow. It plays right into the whole “oppressive patriarchy” narrative and makes more women feel the need to be more aggressive in this “men v women” fight. But this is far from the truth. To show just how delusional these rhetorics can be, I went to the planned parenthood website, and here’s what I saw:
“People who oppose abortion often call themselves pro-life. However, the only life many of them are concerned with is the life of the fertilized egg, embryo, or fetus. They are much less concerned about the life of women who have unintended pregnancies or the welfare of children after they’re born. In fact, many people who call themselves “pro-life” support capital punishment (AKA the death penalty) and oppose child welfare legislation.”
After this totally false representation above, they go on below:
The black-and-white labels of “pro-life” and “pro-choice” pit people against each other as if they’re on two different teams. But we agree more than we disagree.
How anyone can slander and make peace simultaneously is beyond me.
The idea is to use lies to discredit the validity of the concern from the pro-life camp. I also despise any lies coming from any purported pro-life people too. Honesty is the only way forward.
So if we say “pro-life,” it does not mean “Your body, our choice,” or “save the baby, kill the mother,” or any other horrible interpretation anyone with an agenda will want to give it. But you can see how making it look like that will favor the pro-choice camp.
Pro-life people believe life begins at conception and are fighting to preserve the life of the mother and the child. Not one life at the expense of the other. We want both mother and child to be healthy; we want young people to value sex and take it seriously. We want responsibility for every sexual activity and a sane world where truth is sought and spread. This is not a religious fight but a social fight; a fight every sane human being will agree is worth it.
So, pro-choice people believe in a person’s fundamental right to choose what happens to them. We all agree on this point, and in this way, pro-life people are also pro-choice. But once there is no longer one life to consider but two: one who can choose (the woman) and another who is vulnerable they cannot choose (the baby), then we choose to defend their rights as we do the mother’s. The current fight is only collateral “damage” resulting from a more universal fight for everyone’s right to life: mothers and children alike.
Is it fair to eliminate a human life in order to solve a problem? The answer to which is: no. Second question: Is it fair to pay a sniper to solve a problem? No. Abortion is not a religious problem in the sense that just because I am Catholic I must not seek an abortion. It is a human problem. It is a problem of eliminating a human life. Period.Pope Francis, 2019
[M]odern genetic science brings valuable confirmation. It has demonstrated that, from the first instant, there is established the program of what this living being will be: a human, this individual human with his characteristic aspects already well determined. Right from fertilization is begun the adventure of a human life, and each of its capacities requires time–a rather lengthy time–to find its place and to be in a position to act. The least that can be said is that present science, in its most evolved state, does not give any substantial support to those who defend abortion.Declaration on Procured Abortion, Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
November 18, 1974