Just about every pro-lifer has been in a debate with a pro-choicer. We have all heard the same talking points they like to throw around, half of them not even being true. Here, I have compiled five of the misconceptions pro-choice people often use in arguments and why they are false.

“A fetus is just a clump of cells.”

This lie is one of the easiest to prove wrong.  With today’s technology, it is obvious that a fetus is a human being.  At three weeks, their heart begins to beat. At five weeks, the head, hands, and feet form. By the end of the first trimester, 12 weeks, the child is fully formed.  It can move its hands and mouth, and its organs are forming with a working liver. This is when most of the child’s vital development occurs, within the first trimester, and the child continues to grow and develop throughout the second and third trimesters.  It does not make sense for anyone to call a fetus, “just a clump of cells.” It is obviously so much more.  It is a human being.

“Abortion needs to be legal for women who were raped.”

Pro-choice people use this argument so much that it seems as if this is the main reason why women get abortions. That is false.  This reason only accounts for 0.3% of the reasons why women get abortions.  The argument that women who were raped did not choose to be pregnant, and therefore, should be allowed to have an abortion, is one of the main talking points of the pro-choice argument, yet hardly any women abort their children because they were raped.

Despite the fact that only 0.3% of women abort their children because they were raped, some still may argue that it needs to be legal for them. Being raped is one of the worst things imaginable to happen to a person. I wish that no one ever has to be in that situation, but as terrible as it is, it still does not justify killing a child. Two wrongs do not make a right.  If the mother does not want their child, that is completely understandable, but adoption is an option.  Killing the child could make the situation worse. In fact, many would argue it puts the mother through another traumatic experience.

“I have the right to do whatever I want with my own body.”

“My body. My choice,” is often chanted by the pro-choice movement. This statement is factually incorrect.  Just because the fetus is inside a mother’s body does not mean that it is a part of her body.  It is a completely different person with a different set of DNA, and the child could also have a different blood type and gender than the mother.  Randy Alcorn, author of Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, wrote, “A Chinese zygote implanted in a Swedish woman will always be Chinese, not Swedish, because his identity is based on his genetic code, not on that of the body in which he resides,” and he is correct since the fetus is a separate person.  

Also, out of the 92 countries where the death penalty is legal, 83 of them do not allow pregnant women to be killed.  This is because it would be killing an innocent, living child who is a separate person from their mother. Despite all of the evidence proving that the child inside of a mother’s body is not her body, people who are pro-choice still use this argument often.

“A fetus in the first and second trimester can’t survive on its own, so it is not morally wrong to kill it.”

Many pro-choice people say that a fetus before 20 weeks has no brain waves. They claim a fetus, at this stage, is technically brain dead. Therefore, they think it is okay to kill since someone who is brain dead since they’re “not really alive.”  Ben Shapiro made a great point about this on an episode of “The Ben Shapiro Show.”  He said, “People who are brain dead don’t turn into not brain dead three weeks later. Would you kill someone in a coma because they’re brain dead if you know they’re not going to be brain dead in four weeks, ten weeks?  Would you pull the plug knowing if you wait a few weeks that person’s going to be fully functional again?” Any reasonable person would not.  What is the difference with an unborn child?  Both are human beings that deserve the right to life. No one should be allowed to deny them this right.

“You can’t be for limited government if you’re not pro-choice.”

This lie has been told by the pro-choice libertarians who say that someone cannot be for limited government if they are not for abortion.  They treat this issue like how they treat drugs.  They may be personally against abortion, but they still believe that the government should not be allowed to stop women from making the decision to abort their children. The only way this would make logical sense is if you are an anarchist and believe that there should be no government. If you are a libertarian that is for a limited government to protect the people’s rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then you shouldn’t be pro-choice.  Abortion clearly violates the unborn children’s right to life. Science has proven that human life begins at conception. Killing an unborn child goes against libertarian values. Being libertarian should not prevent anyone from being pro life.  The two are not mutually exclusive.

Rose L