Today in Washington DC, hundreds of thousands of people – men, women, rich, poor, Christian, Jewish, atheist, gay, straight, and more — will all rally around one cause – life. Specifically, the life of unborn children. It’s a fantastic, peaceful event that this year will feature Vice President Pence as a speaker.
The people who support the extreme position of abortion on demand (nearly the entire Democratic Party), have reached a point where they are losing the debate, and they don’t like it. A recent Marist poll on the issue of abortion is striking:
The poll demonstrates that there is a clear bi-partisan consensus on limiting abortion to – at most – the first trimester, with a majority of Clinton supporters (55 percent) and more than nine in 10 Trump supporters (91 percent) saying they support such limits.
55 percent of Hillary Clinton supporters support limiting abortion to the first trimester.
The pro-life movement has come a long way since the era of protests in front of abortion clinics. Twenty years ago, the pro-life movement was largely predicated on moral and religious grounds. The pro-choice side would argue “viability” as a response, smugly claiming the higher ground as a result. They’d point to polls that asked the broad question of, “Do you consider yourself pro-life or pro-choice?” with a majority saying “pro-choice.” It wasn’t until the poll started detailing the question that people were able to see where the American people stood on the issue. Supporters of abortion on demand suddenly found they were in the minority.
Over the last 20 years, public opinion shifted more due to advances in science. Babies born prematurely have far higher survival rates than they ever have before. Advances in medicine and science are improving the odds every day. This has created a quandary for the pro-choice forces, so they turn to arguments they’ve used before, but with far more ferocity.
A large number of people in the pro-life movement are men. Abortion supporters, in particular feminists, are fond using several logical fallacies in attempting to “win” the argument. One they employ with impunity is to say since men don’t have a uterus or a vagina, they have no say in the debate.
It is one of the dumbest arguments ever conceived. Think about it for a moment. Since when does a person’s sex determine the validity of their argument? It makes no sense. For their argument to have any legitimacy whatsoever would require that only men be pro-life. Since that is not true, then according to their pretzel logic, women who are pro-life are on equal ground as long as they are walking around with their uteruses intact.
As for the inability of men to give birth, it is entirely irrelevant. Until such time women can asexually reproduce like a whiptail lizard, guys are still involved with the birth of babies whether it happens in a bedroom or a bathroom stall into a cup at a donor bank.
Pro-choice people are forced to rely on such silly arguments because their position is one that is morally bankrupt. When 55% of Hillary Clinton supporters approve of restrictions on abortion after the first trimester, it reveals the position of abortion on demand (which the overwhelming majority of Democrats support) — at any time for any reason — to be one that is extreme.
They are the extremists. Not us.
Today, people will be marching in support of human rights. It is something people – men and women – will be proud to do. And the radical abortion rights supporters won’t be able to stop it.