Giving a Voice to the Unborn: My Issue With a Recent Pro-Choice Argument

My husband and I frequently listen to a radio show called “Catholic Answers.” It’s apologetics for the Catholic faith and we find it extremely interesting to hear all the questions and disagreements. Often times, they only allow people who disagree with them to call in. The other day the topic centered around abortion. Only people who were pro-choice could call in to speak with an apologist named, Trent Horn. He specializes in pro-life arguments and for the most part argues for life without using religion. Anyway, on this particular day, Kathy called in, and frankly, Kathy made my blood boil. I had to walk away from her call because the anger I felt at her “argument” or lack thereof, was more than I could stomach. I wanted to forget Kathy and her words, but I couldn’t. They’ve been hanging over my head like the dark, death cloud that they are and I am compelled to respond to her.

Kathy sounded young, maybe early twenties. She stated that she had no children and planned never to have biological children. Now that I’ve had some time to digest her pro-choice argument, I feel that I can answer without anger clouding my view. I want to speak logically, intelligently, and with truth.

It is hard to remove emotion when speaking about abortion, no matter what side you are on, but I will try to do my best. This is a delicate subject. On the pro-life side, it is deeply upsetting to accept the unwarranted killing of an innocent baby.  If you are on the pro-choice side, many times, you have been involved in some way with abortion and it can be difficult to hear that pro-lifers believe this to be the unwarranted killing of an innocent child. It is not my intention to compound pain, though it may. I believe these babies need a voice and the truth to be spoken on their behalf, as they are unable to speak for themselves. If you are pro-choice and are reading this, I implore you to take a breath and just think about what is really being said on both sides.

I will italicize Kathy’s words and respond to them below each section. With that, here we go.

Why is it okay for the government to keep women imprisoned in their own bodies?

I’m not sure what this really means. First, in speaking about abortion, the government allows abortions at this point in our history. So, she really has nothing to complain about. Second, what does “imprisoned in their own bodies” mean?  How does a baby growing inside of a woman imprison her? She is free to walk around, she is not held anywhere against her will? I’m not sure I understand how one could be imprisoned in a body that is their own. This is an arbitrary argument that really has no true meaning. The words she uses are meant to draw emotion. It’s not meant as a sound, logical argument.  This is something that both sides should be wary of; this propaganda language meant to dissuade from a weak argument.  Yes, during pregnancy you cannot do absolutely everything you would like to do, but in no way are you imprisoned inside of yourself.

So you have this fetus, this baby, this whatever you want to call it.

We have words in our world for a purpose. Each thing is assigned a name or a word so that when we speak with each other we can have understandable communication. If I woke up tomorrow and decided that I was going to call books, radios instead, things might get confusing at my house. If I asked my kids to bring me a radio and they fetch me an actual radio and not a book, I can’t get mad at them. A book is a book, because that is the name it has been assigned. A fetus is the name we assign to an unborn baby that is over eight weeks from conception. The reason it has the name fetus is because medically we need a name for a baby that hasn’t yet been born. It’s a stage of development. Just like there is the embryonic stage of a baby, we also have the fetus stage. To add to that, we have a toddler stage and a teenager stage.

What bothers me is the flippant remark of “whatever you want to call it.” No, we don’t get to call it whatever we want. It’s a baby. A fetus is still a baby, just not born yet. Words matter. We’re not picking out ice cream flavors here, we are talking about life–life of a human.

So, they have this parasitic thing inside them, its leeching calcium from their bones, its forcing hormonal changes, its changing the woman’s body, her overall structure and everything. Then eventual its going to force its way out of a hole that I don’t even consider an exit.

Take that all in. I mean, really read what she said. I did not make up one bit of it. Let’s take it piece-by-piece.

They have this parasitic thing inside them…

As far as we know scientifically, no parasite has ever entered a human being and then itself turned into a human being. It just remains a parasite. A fertilized human egg turns into a human. If you were wanting to dehumanize a human you would use the word parasite, because, obviously a parasite is something you most definitely want to get out of your body. Tread with caution when people use euphemisms. It means they do not want to speak aloud the true word(s) because of the way it makes them feel. I struggle to see how abortion advocates consider a fetus a baby only if the baby is wanted. If they don’t want it, it’s a parasite. It cannot be both. The reason it can’t is because an actual parasite is always a different species. If I went in to see the doctor and they discovered a parasite in my small intestines, the doctor would never say, “Well, we discovered a baby in your small intestines.”

It is true that a baby does rely on its mother for nutrients and support in order to grow. This is necessary for our species, or any mammal for that matter, to carry on. At the moment of conception, the human baby doesn’t just magically turn into a 9-month old and pop out. It needs time to develop and grow in order to get to a place where it can survive on its own.  The uterus of a woman is designed for this. It has no other purpose but to grow and sustain a human baby.

Its leeching calcium from their bones…

I seriously hope Kathy doesn’t drink soft drinks because they leech calcium, too. This seems to be a concern of hers, but I assure you that calcium pills work wonders.

Its forcing hormonal changes…

So do a lot of other things. Females go through a hormonal change around the early teenage years. Why? Specifically so we CAN have babies. Women also go through a hormonal change later in life (menopause). Why? Specifically so we stop having babies, because our bodies are not as capable anymore. I’m curious if Kathy will work diligently to stop all of these forced hormonal changes. Hormones are apart of our lives. They regulate so much of our body. Every single day we have hormonal changes forced upon us by our brain telling our body to release them. It’s how our bodies work. What I find fascinating is how they work so well to help a woman’s body to care for the unborn baby inside her.

Its changing the woman’s body, her overall structure and everything.

Puberty changes structure, too. I’m willing to bet that Kathy is glad she doesn’t still have the body of a nine-year old. Time also changes our bodies. They are constantly changing and one day, Kathy will grow old and she will watch her body change in many different ways. It’s the nature of things. Yes, a woman’s body changes with pregnancy. It has to accommodate the baby. Thank goodness it does, because if it didn’t, you and I would not be here. It does what it is designed to do.

Then eventual its going to force its way out of a hole that I don’t even consider an exit.

Just because Kathy doesn’t consider it an exit, doesn’t mean it isn’t. Even if I decide that the book lying next to me is no longer a book, it still is. Every orifice on our body is an exit, even our pores. As a woman, I would think that Kathy could see that every month, menstruation exits her body through the very hole that she doesn’t consider an exit.

Why is it okay for the government to tell you, you have to incubate this little creature until its fully developed?

Little creature? I sincerely hope it is apparent all the dehumanization that has gone on here in Kathy’s few sentences. In order to have an abortion or to make it sound acceptable, the level of dehumanization that has to go on to justify it in one’s mind is worth note. Why? Because if Kathy can see this baby as anything other than what it truly is, it’s not a big deal to end its life.

Pro-choice advocates promote the idea that abortion is all about choice. But, it’s obviously more than that if they have to change and manipulate the language to make it sound like women should have the choice to remove a parasite/creature from their bodies. They are uncomfortable in saying that it is the killing of a baby. A small baby, yes, but a baby still. When you say it for what it is, there becomes no choice, because the killing of an innocent human being is morally wrong no matter its stage of development. What is morally right is for the strong to protect, care, and defend the weak even when it is difficult and unexpected.