“Forced birthers?”

One of the most popular personal attacks that pro-abortion extremists like to use against pro-lifers is “forced birther.”  They appear to like the rhetorical impact of pretending that we are forcing something on someone rather than protecting innocent life.  You have a few options when facing that challenge.

The first, and possibly best, is to just ignore them.  Sometimes letting the pro-abortionist extremists talk as long and loudly as possible does the most good for the anti-abortion cause.  When they talk of babies as intruders, parasites, etc. to justify abortion it exposes their evil to the middle ground.

But you can also turn it around on them by referring to them as “forced deathers.”  After  all, the human being is coming out of her mother one way or another — dead or alive.  She doesn’t just disappear.  We aren’t forcing anyone to give birth, we are just saying that you shouldn’t kill unwanted children in any location — even if, in warped pro-abortion extremist logic, they claim to be doing it for the child’s own good (“they might be poor, abused, etc.”).  They are the ones forcing death.

And you can also point out that anyone using the “forced birther” ad hominem argument is pro-“partial-birth abortion” (aka infanticide).  Since even the majority of those identifying as pro-choice oppose that procedure then those who use that silly term will out themselves as the extremists that they are.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on ““Forced birthers?””

  1. Here’s another option: Point and laugh. Loudly, and for long periods, yelling about what an idiot the person is for expecting anyone to believe they put forth a legitimate point. “IS THAT THE BEST YOU GOT?!! BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!”

    In truth, they are far worse than mere idiots, and they need to be publicly mocked for the fools and murderers they are.

    Like

  2. This is a short must-read on this topic [http://blog.secularprolife.org/2014/04/no-i-am-not-interested-in-punishing.html]. Here’s an excerpt:

    So when abortion supporters chant “Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy!” and accuse the pro-life movement of wanting to “punish” sexually active women (as if babies are punishments, as opposed to human beings), my mind always goes to the concept of foreseeability. When a person has sexual intercourse, pregnancy is a foreseeable result. That does not mean that the sexually active person has done something wrong or deserves to be punished. Let me repeat that: saying that pregnancy is foreseeable is not a moral judgment. It’s just an acknowledgement that, let’s face it, the cause of pregnancy is not exactly mysterious!

    So the question is: who will bear the risk of the situation? Will it be the sexually active person, who did not intend for pregnancy to occur, but who at least has some control over the situation? Or will it be the unborn child, who has no control over the situation whatsoever, and whose very life is at stake?

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s