Frequently Asked QUESTIONS

According to the God who created the universe and all humanity, humans are a unique kind of creation. He has explicitly stated that murder is evil at any age. He Himself took on human flesh and was knit together in His mother's womb from fertilization (Psalm 139:13-16, Luke 1:31).

Scientific consensus affirms this:

• At fertilization, a new, genetically distinct human organism comes into existence
• This organism has its own unique DNA, separate from both mother and father
• From this moment, the human being begins a continuous process of development

This is the definition. This great atrocity must be abolished.

The fetus is just a clump of cells.

Response:

1. Every human being is a "clump of cells." This description applies equally to adults.
2. The unborn child has unique human DNA from the moment of fertilization.
3. The unborn child has a heartbeat as early as 6 weeks.
4. The unborn child can feel pain and responds to stimuli.

The term "fetus" is simply a Latin word meaning "offspring" or "little one." It is a stage of human development, not a different kind of being.

"My body, my choice."

Response:

1. The child in the womb is not the mother's body. It has its own unique DNA, often a different blood type, and may be a different sex.
2. Bodily autonomy does not extend to harming another person. You cannot use your body to assault or kill another human being.
3. The right to bodily autonomy is not absolute. We accept many limitations on it for the good of society (vaccine mandates, drug laws, etc.).
4. If bodily autonomy justified killing, it would justify killing any dependent person (infants, elderly, disabled).

The child's right to life supersedes the mother's preference for convenience.

"What about rape?"

This is one of the most emotionally charged objections. We must respond with compassion while maintaining the truth.

1. Rape is a horrific crime deserving severe punishment. We have deep compassion for rape victims.
2. However, the child conceived in rape is innocent. Why should an innocent child receive the death penalty for the crime of his father?
3. Two wrongs don't make a right. Adding violence (abortion) to violence (rape) does not bring healing.
4. Many women who have abortions after rape report additional trauma, not healing.
5. We should punish rapists, not innocent children.

The circumstances of fertilization do not determine a person's value or right to life.

"What if the pregnancy threatens the mother's life?"

Response:

1. Legitimate medical interventions to save the mother's life are not the same as elective abortion.
2. When a doctor performs a procedure to save the mother and the child dies as an unintended consequence, this is not murder.
3. Directly killing the child is never medically necessary. Treatment of the mother may result in the child's death, but the death is not the goal.
4. Modern medicine has advanced to the point where these situations are extremely rare.

We affirm that both lives have equal value, and doctors should make every effort to save both.

"You can't legislate your religion!"

Response:

1. Where does your law that religious beliefs shouldn't influence legislation come from? That itself is a religious or philosophical claim.
2. All law is based on moral values. The question is: whose morality?
3. The pro-choice position is also a moral position. It makes claims about personhood, rights, and value.
4. We don't need religious arguments to oppose abortion. Science and reason support the pro-life position.
5. Laws against murder, theft, and assault are all based on moral beliefs. Should we repeal them?

Refusing to allow religious beliefs to influence legislation is itself a religious position that would disqualify most legislation in history.

"No uterus, no opinion!"

Response:

1. This argument would also silence pro-choice men. Do you really want to do that?
2. Many women are pro-life. In fact, women are roughly split on the issue.
3. Truth is not determined by the identity of the speaker. An argument is valid or invalid regardless of who makes it.
4. By this logic, we couldn't oppose slavery unless we were slaves, or oppose child abuse unless we were children.
5. Abortion affects the entire society, not just women.

The most affected party in an abortion is the child, who has no voice at all.

"Don't like abortion? Don't have one!"

Response:

1. Every law "forces beliefs" on others. Laws against murder force the belief that murder is wrong.
2. "Don't like slavery? Don't own a slave!" Would this argument have been acceptable?
3. We're not talking about personal preferences like ice cream flavors. We're talking about human lives.
4. Justice requires defending the innocent, even if some disagree.

"The child would be born into poverty/abuse/etc."

Response:

1. This argument justifies killing anyone who has a difficult life. Should we kill homeless people?
2. We cannot predict the future. Many successful people came from difficult circumstances.
3. The solution to poverty is not to kill poor people but to help them.
4. Many couples are waiting to adopt. There is no shortage of loving homes.
5. If difficult circumstances justify killing, we could justify killing anyone at any age.

We should address problems without killing innocent human beings.

"Women will die in back alleys!"

Response:

1. Should we legalize all crimes because some people will commit them anyway? Should we legalize bank robbery to make it "safer"?
2. The statistics about back-alley abortion deaths before Roe v. Wade were vastly exaggerated.
3. Abortion kills a child every time. We cannot legalize murder to make it "safer" for the murderer.
4. Making abortion illegal does reduce abortion rates, as we've seen in many states and countries.
5. We should provide resources for pregnant women, not kill their children.

Response:

1. No. Miscarriages are natural deaths, not homicides.
2. We don't investigate every natural death. We investigate suspicious deaths.
3. This argument could apply to any age. "Should every infant death be investigated?" In cases of suspected abuse, yes. In cases of natural illness, no.
4. The law already distinguishes between natural death and homicide. This would be no different.

Response:

1. IVF that creates and destroys embryos is morally problematic because it intentionally creates human beings knowing many will die.
2. Each embryo is a unique human being with its own DNA.
3. Alternatives exist that do not involve creating excess embryos.
4. The desire for children does not justify creating and discarding human lives.

We encourage adoption and forms of fertility treatment that respect the dignity of all human life.

"Why don't you care about children after they're born?"

Response:

1. This is a false choice. We can care about both.
2. Pro-lifers adopt at higher rates than the general population.
3. Crisis pregnancy centers provide extensive support for mothers and children.
4. Would you accept this argument about any other injustice? "Why focus on sex trafficking when there are homeless people?"
5. The fact that there are other problems doesn't mean we should ignore the killing of innocent children.

Abolitionists are involved in many forms of charity and care. Fighting abortion doesn't preclude other good works.

"Shouldn't we take what we can get?"

Response:

1. Incremental bills concede that some babies can be legally killed.
2. A heartbeat bill says it's OK to kill a baby before the heartbeat. A 20-week ban says it's OK to kill a baby before 20 weeks.
3. These bills have not worked. After 50 years of incrementalism, abortion is still legal.
4. Abolition is the only strategy that treats all human beings equally from fertilization.
5. Would we have accepted incremental abolition of slavery? "Only 3/5 of slaves can be freed this year"?

Equal justice requires equal protection. We cannot negotiate away the right to life of any human being.

Response:

1. There is a fundamental difference between innocent life and guilty life.
2. The unborn child is completely innocent. A convicted murderer has forfeited his right to life by taking another's.
3. Scripture distinguishes between murder (prohibited) and lawful execution (permitted in some circumstances).
4. Protecting innocent life and punishing guilty murderers are consistent positions.
5. Note: Many abolitionists have varying views on capital punishment. This is not a core issue for abolition.

In Exodus 21:22, God did not regard the prebirth child as of the same stature as the woman. Notice that it says "if there is no serious injury..." This refers to injury to the mother, not the child. If the child is killed, it is still treated as a serious crime requiring compensation.

"The pro-life movement is racist!"

Response:

1. Actually, abortion is racist in its origins and effects.
2. Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was a eugenicist who targeted minority communities.
3. Black babies are aborted at 3.5 times the rate of white babies.
4. 79% of Planned Parenthood facilities are located within walking distance of minority neighborhoods.
5. More black babies are aborted than born in New York City.

Abortion is the leading cause of death in the black community. Fighting abortion is fighting racism.

"You're just hateful extremists!"

Response:

1. Westboro Baptist Church celebrates death and rejoices in tragedy. We mourn the death of every aborted child.
2. WBC attacks people. We seek to save both mothers and babies.
3. WBC spreads hatred. We spread the gospel of love and forgiveness.
4. Our message is one of hope: there is forgiveness in Christ for all sins, including abortion.
5. We affirm our non-violence statement and commitment to peaceful, lawful activism.

Read our non-violence statement for more information.

Response:

1. Every citizen has the right to advocate for just laws.
2. Laws against murder are not controversial. We simply believe the unborn are human beings who deserve legal protection.
3. The question is not whether we have the "right" to make laws, but whether the laws are just.
4. Do you think advocates for any other cause don't have the right to change laws?

Absolutely not.

Response:

1. We condemn all violence against any person, including abortionists.
2. Violence is not only wrong but counterproductive to our cause.
3. We seek to change hearts and laws through peaceful, legal means.
4. The gospel calls us to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us.
5. We believe in the power of truth, not violence, to change minds.

Read our non-violence statement for our full position on this issue.