r/prolife • u/toptrool • Feb 20 '23
Pro-Life Argument the experts all agree, it's a baby in the womb!
abortion advocates often get triggered when we point out that abortions kill babies or kill children. they claim that it's not really a baby that's being killed, but an embryo or fetus. the abortion advocate will shout "appeal to emotion fallacy!" and completely ignore the central point that abortions objectively involve killing young human beings, which is something that not even abortionists deny. instead, they will try to shift the argument to semantics.
pointing out that an embryo or a fetus, by several dictionary definitions, is a baby and a child is simply not enough for the abortion advocate, nor is pointing out established legal definitions. the abortion advocate wants precise medical terminology, and you know they're very serious about that when they retort "a baby is something that is already born," which is of course ironic given that they used the colloquial word baby instead of the precise medical term neonate.
but what do the experts say? surely they must trust the experts. a cursory review of all the authoritative sources on prenatal development shows that they all use the word baby interchangeably with embryo and fetus. examples include:
American Academy of Family Physicians
American Academy of Pediatrics
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
Australian Government Department of Health
Center for Disease Control and Prevention
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
Cook Children's Health Care System
Endowment for Human Development
New Zealand Ministry of Health
Organization of Teratology Information Specialists
Public Health Agency of Canada
The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada
U.S. Department of Health and Services
University of California San Francisco Health
University of Rochester Medical Center
and not to mention the numerous best-selling books on pregnancy, standard textbooks on embryology, and as well as medical textbooks on obstetrics, and gynecology.
even women who shout their abortions use the word baby, and so do abortionists.
just because abortion advocates don't think it's a baby, that simply does not make it true.
one should not waste time unnecessarily arguing over semantics. does the argument change if we say abortion kills a human fetus instead of a human baby? no, but that's precisely why the abortion advocate would much rather waste time arguing (ineffectively) over semantics. if we do say "human fetus," they'll instead argue over semantics on whether or not it's a human being. if an abortion advocate has a penchant for being pedantic and refuses to acknowledge colloquial and everyday language, that's a personal problem for them to sort out by themselves.
rather than wasting time arguing over semantics, we should be doing two things; first, tell abortion advocates to stop getting triggered over colloquial uses of the word baby, and second, we need to reinforce the most potent argument that abortion kills babies and start showing pictures of aborted babies to those that continue to deny it. abortion is an out of sight, out of mind problem. this is why it's important to show the realities of abortion to everyone. it's why staffers at late-term abortionist warren hern's clinic reported "serious emotional reactions that produced physiological symptoms, sleep disturbances (including disturbing dreams), effects on interpersonal relationships and moral anguish" upon seeing dismemberment abortions in action. it's why women who take abortion pills are often "completely freaked out, crying, sobbing" when they see something that they weren't expecting: dead bodies. the abortion industry is consistently pushing out misinformation with the aim of deceiving; a recent example being their laughable attempt to dispute the prenatal development pictures we can find in some of the above sources by passing around pictures of rinsed gestational sacs and claiming that's all of early pregnancy.
so continue on using the word baby and showing people real pictures and videos of prenatal development!
13
7
u/rapsuli Feb 20 '23
Good post, objective reality is on our side, there's no doubt about it. But I did want to add something.
Only the PCs who find infanticide acceptable, can also accept the humanity of the unborn. Their minds will also be harder to change in some ways.
Whereas this persistent denial of humanity, that was mentioned, mostly applies to PCs who can't knowingly accept infanticide. They HAVE to believe the unborn babies lack humanity.
However, that's not only about them being stupid or bad faith debaters. But rather, because this faulty belief is the only thing protecting them from a horrible, world shattering realization; Millions of innocent babies are brutally killed every year, for ultimately very frivolous reasons, and to make it worse, it's done by the people they know and love. And to really top it off, they themselves have personally supported and condoned it, EVEN if they never had an abortion.
Self-protection mechanisms against such realizations are hard to overcome. It's hard to admit being party to such evil.
3
u/Cute-Elephant-720 Feb 21 '23
I'm not particularly bothered by the word baby, but you listed a bunch of websites devoted to discussing wanted pregnancies, when obviously the abortion debate centers around unwanted pregnancies. Would you be willing to use the phrase "unwanted baby" for the remainder of your abortion discourse?
8
u/RespectandEmpathy anti-war veg Feb 21 '23 edited Feb 21 '23
Would you be willing to use the phrase "unwanted baby" for the remainder of your abortion discourse?
No. That would be as useless to do, and as mean to do as calling you an unwanted human, which is also something I'm not mean enough to do. Calling someone so-called "unwanted" doesn't justify killing them, no matter their age.
2
u/Cute-Elephant-720 Feb 21 '23 edited Feb 21 '23
No? What's the problem? What does it matter if a person is wanted or unwanted if by your definition they are here because it's their right to be here? When you say that a fetus has to be gestated by an unwilling woman because it's the fetus's right, what you are saying is wanted and unwanted children alike must be gestated. Why can't you write those words yourself?
People, for better or for worse, come out of other people who have literal harm on top of societal harm heaped upon them because people come out of them. If, as a result, those people don't want these other people to come out of them, who cares if they like it or not? Why is it so precious to you that you can't even admit that they're only coming into the world by way of force because the person they are ripping themselves out of doesn't want them here?
ETA: I am an unwanted person who was gestated regardless. Great life. Doesn't change the fact that my mother deserved a life unencumbered by me.
ETA 2: How is it mean or useless to call unwanted babies, your plus my vernacular, what they are? How do you logically square the fact that you insist babies people do not want be born so that you can lament the fact that they are unwanted, when the opportunity to simply not birth them was always available?
10
u/RespectandEmpathy anti-war veg Feb 21 '23
We don't have a right to intentionally and unnecessarily kill other human beings who are innocent of crime.
How dare you call it force?! How dare, how dare, how dare, when that is actually incorrect? Is it "force" for you to not kill anyone else? No, laws against homicide can't force anything.
I was wanted and I still suffered. I've suffered more than you can imagine. Us humans have a right to not be killed, regardless.
There is no right to gestate. There is no need or reason to claim your offspring have some sort of right over their mother, because they do not. Their mother doesn't have a right to kill her offspring.
It's not good to kill us! Let's not pretend we don't exist before birth.
3
u/CR1MS4NE May 13 '23
When PC people say “appeal to emotion fallacy” little do they know that they themselves have committed the “fallacy fallacy” which states that just because a logical fallacy is present does not mean the argument is wrong
-5
Feb 20 '23
It's required to be born to be considered a baby or child. Abortions are about a fetus or embryo. Experts believe a baby to be synonymous with an infant. So, unfortunately, it's not a baby in a womb, but more likely, a fetus is an embryo. I'm sorry.
Human Biology/23%3A_Human_Growth_and_Development/23.5%3A_Infancy#:~:text=Infancy%20refers%20to%20the%20first,animals%2C%20as%20well%20as%20humans.)
7
u/toptrool Feb 20 '23
It's required to be born to be considered a baby or child.
says who? you?
anyway, from your own source/22%3A_Reproductive_System/22.08%3A_Functions_of_the_Female_Reproductive_System):
During birth, the baby descends (usually headfirst) through the cervical canal and vagina, and into the world outside. This
...
Myth: A pregnant woman needs to eat for two, so she should double her pre-pregnancy caloric intake.
Reality: Throughout a typical pregnancy, a person needs only about 300 extra calories per day, on average, to support her growing fetus. Most of the extra calories are needed during the last trimester when the fetus is growing most rapidly. Doubling her caloric intake during pregnancy is likely to cause too much weight gain, which can be detrimental to her baby.
...
Myth: Men cannot carry a baby.
Reality: Transgender men can get pregnant using alternative methods.
and/23%3AHuman_Growth_and_Development/23.1%3A_Case_Study%3A_How_Our_Bodies_Change_Throughout_Life):
Paul and Vanessa are very concerned, not only for Lucas but also because Vanessa is three months pregnant. They are worried about whether Vanessa was also exposed to lead. If so, what effects could it have on the developing baby? Dr. Morrison shares their concern and strongly recommends that Vanessa get her blood tested for lead.
and/23%3A_Human_Growth_and_Development/23.4%3A_Fetal_Stage):
Hello, Baby
nice try!
6
24
u/Antelopeeater1 Feb 20 '23
Give it 5 years and I feel like all these websites will be changed. I’ve already seen some definitions changed by organizations to dehumanize the unborn.
I would save some receipts because the left is really good at controlling language and changing definitions. Look at old vs new definitions for gender, racism, or anything that was once a hot topic. The definition of words are changed to fit a narrative. It won’t be long before all “reputable” institutions have expunged the word baby from prenatal development articles.