Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice Flashcards
‘Slavery Comparison’
> Do you think slavery is wrong?
> Why do you think it’s wrong?
> Yet there was a time when slavery was considered normal - millions of people were horrifically treated and subjected to a life of unthinkable misery, and a way people tried to got around how evil this was morally was to de-humanise the victims
> When do you think life begins?
> A few years ago a survey was conducted on biologists to assess their conclusions on when human life actually begins. This was collected from 1058 academic institutions across the world. 96% of them came back affirming that human life begins at conception
> Despite this, so many people - even after hearing this - will still try to de-humanise these unborn babies as a way to try to justify the evil of killing millions of them through abortions
> Many people still want abortion to exist, but don’t want to have face it’s horrific moral implications. So just like with slavery people will try still try to suppress the truth of what is being done to these human beings in order to feel okay about - and to justify - something which they would recognise is evil if they allowed themselves to be honest
> What do you think about this?
“It’s my body and I have a right to do what I please with it”
> When do you think life begins?
> In 2021 the results of a survey was posted, taken from 1,058 academic institutions around the world to assess when they scientifically believed that a human’s life begins. Overall, 96% (5337 out of 5577) affirmed that life begins at conception
> So your argument is that ‘it’s a person’s choice what they do with their body’
> What about the rights of the human baby in the womb? - once conceived, according to science, they exist just the same as you and I do right now
…
> Given the scientific clarification we have now, what this argument will ultimately boil down to is whether or not we believe there are moral justifications for killing an unborn human baby in the womb
> It’s either this or we ignore the science and continue to dehumanise the baby by way of avoiding the question (which I’ve seen a lot of people do)
> Would you disagree with this?
> So where do you stand on it?
“Do you think Abortion is wrong based on your religious beliefs?”
> If that were to be the case what’s your honest opinion on that stance? (I do have an answer to that question, I just want to make sure why you’re asking it)
> My beliefs regarding the inherent value of every unborn person in the womb are down to my religious beliefs
> My beliefs regarding whether that person is ACTUALLY a human being at the moment of conception are down to both my religious beliefs and present science
> [Give Scientific Backing]
“What you’re saying is very inflammatory and manipulative”
> Let me put it to you this way:
> Imagine you and I went back in time to the when slavery was legal, when people who were considered slaves were legally subjected to a lives of unthinkable misery and even sometimes killed by their owners
> and you know you’ll recognise that what is happening is wrong - that these are human beings being put through this - but a way that those who were all for slavery tried to get away from the morality of what was happening was to de-humanise them, to make believe that they’re not human
> Now imagine that you decided to speak up on this matter to try to get people to face the reality that these are actual human beings being treated this way
> And then I came along and told you that “it’s wrong for you to try to make people face this reality” - because it might upset somebody who is to some degree involved or just thinks otherwise to have to realise this - what would your response be if I came along and said this?
…
> The reality is - yes - to try to bring somebody out of the lie that abortion is an innocent and victimless act rather than being the mass killing of unborn babies is going to be emotionally stirring as it’s a terrible truth to face, but it is just as necessary for us to do that as it would have been to speak up during the time of slavery
‘Science Supporting “Life begins at conception”’
> A few years ago a survey was conducted on biologists to assess their conclusions on when human life actually begins. This was collected from 1058 academic institutions across the world. 96% of them came back affirming that human life begins at conception
> 85% of the 5,577 biologists self-identified as pro-choice, 89% self-identified as liberal, and 95% held a Ph. D
“96% doesn’t mean they know for certain that life begins at conception”
> Okay, let me give you a hypothetical scenario
> Imagine a new planet has just been discovered, and astronomers believe this place to be more beautiful than anything you could see or imagine here on earth, that to go and experience that would be a life changing experience
> Now imagine you and the people you love most in your life all got free tickets to go and visit it. Sounds good right? Would you go?
> Okay, but in this scenario there’s one problem: It is believed by the high majority of scientists who have studied this planet that as soon as you stepped foot on it the atmosphere would kill you. Okay, so a survey was taken from 1000 scientific institutes across the world and 96% of this to be true
> Would you still visit the planet? Would you allow your friends and family to visit it?
> Okay, the difference in your stance between that the analogy and the biological statistics get to the heart of your stance on abortion quite quickly
> In the analogy you rightly care enough about the near certainty of you and your loved ones dying that you wouldn’t want to go and wouldn’t want to let them go
> With the science I gave you, I told the exact same statistical probability that there is a 96% chance that real human babies are being killed during ever abortion, yet you don’t seem to care enough about them to be against abortion
> So: Probable death of your loved ones, probable death of innocent babies. You’re against one but not the other, which much mean you care bout something more than this one which I want to try and understand
> For what reasons do you think it’s okay to kill what is almost certainly a baby in the womb?
‘Post-abortion Overall Well-being Statistics’
> UK Study, 2005 (Almost 600,000 Woman studied):
-Nearly 6x the suicide rate of woman who remained pregnant
-Around 3x the suicide rate of general public
> The Elliot Institute (164 rape victims, 28 incest victims)
-Nearly 80% reported that abortion was the wrong solution
-Most woman who had abortions said it only increased trauma
-More than 80% of woman who carried pregnancy to birth said they were happy they had continued
-None of the woman who gave birth to a child conceived in sexual assault expressed regret or wished they had aborted instead
“What about babies who will be brought into a life where they’ll suffer?”
“I’m Pro-Life, but if someone wants to have an abortion that’s up to them”
> What would you think of someone saying: “I’m anti-slavery, but if someone wants to own a slave that’s up to them”
‘Ultimatum Sentence’
> Okay so finish this sentence for me: ‘It’s okay to kill a baby in the womb when…’
“What about if a 12 year old girl was raped?”
> I do have an answer to that question which I’ll give you in two parts
> First I quickly want to address this perspective of abortion being the solution to that kind of trauma (which I assume is why you’d bring up that point?)
> Okay, so statistically we know that the girl would only be adding to her already existing trauma
> One UK study found that women were 6 times more likely to commit suicide after having an abortion when compared to woman who continued with their pregnancy
> Another study which focused particularly on abortions in cases of rape or incest found that:
…
> My main answer to your question is that; as horrifically awful as it would be for that to happen to the girl, the new human baby she becomes pregnant with is not less valuable because he or she was conceived in rape - a baby conceived consensually is not more valuable than that baby. They have just as much right to life as any other.
> Imagine if a family had two children and was treated with love and care because that child was the result of consensual sex, and then a second child who is treated with no love, has to sleep outside, is barely fed and is ultimately treated as less that human all because they were conceived through rape
> So to summarise my answer: Abortion is not the answer to the trauma of rape, it won’t cure that existing trauma and will only add to it. And no baby in the womb deserves to be killed just because they are the direct result that act - they should be cared for and cherished the same as we would do for any other baby.
> Would that be okay?
> It wouldn’t, but that’s exactly what we do when we try to justify abortion in not just cases but in general. We’re treating a human being like dirt, like something disposable and unwanted, we’re not giving them the value they have as a brand new little boy or girl of our species
