States:

It's hard not to consider a woman who is willing to have a 32 week abortion the personification of childish. Even the majority of pro-choicers would consider an abortion this late to be murder.

BABIES ARE DYING WHILE THE LIFE AT CONCEPTION ACT SITS IN CONGRESS FOR 19 MONTHS AND COUNTING!!! PLEASE SHARE THIS! Republicans have controlled Congress for 19 months. The more people who see this, the more attention we can bring to the Life at Conception Act and the need for Congress to bring it to a vote!

Since H.R. 722 was introduced in the House on January 24, 2025 https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/722, and S. 3667 was introduced in the Senate on January 15, 2026 https://www.congress.gov/.../119th-congress/senate-bill/3667, the Life at Conception Act has remained in Congress without advancing to a vote.

I dont entirely identify as prolife (yet) but the moral question of abortion gravely concerns me, and at this point I agree with almost everything on the liberal side of politics except for abortion. It makes me very politically homeless. Anyone else like this?

I'm so tired of being called:

A hypocrite with double standards, a religious extremist, fascist supporter,a misogynist e.t.c.

I'm a gay man,that is very pro gay and trans rights. I'm also viciously anti abortion for the simple reason that abortion kills human beings. I'm convinced that if pro choicers had a say,every single gay and lesbian fetus would be aborted because queer people "would suffer".

I also would like a more diverse pro life movement that includes everyone

#GAY RIGHTS SHOULD BEGIN IN THE WOMB.END ABORTION

Is there really that much difference between dehumanizing the unborn to excuse killing them and excusing Lindsey Clancy for killing children after they're born. I don't think there is much difference. The pro abortion movement has been pushing their propaganda for decades and this is where it has got us.

A woman brutally kills her children and there is a far too large chunk of society that wantsnto make excuses for why it isn't her fault.

ik the tag doesn't exactly fit the post sorry but I really wanted to post this

the comment was in a video that was about someone being mad about a people commenting that they hated kids because they did a mistake, the kid was scared because a butterfly got on his face and (not on purpose) stepped on it and cried

just if you wanted the context!

I went to the pro choice page to see if I can see some of their reasonings and facts. The whole page is dedicated to slandering, not just pro-lifers, but conservatives and religion as a whole. Definitely take a look at it for yourselves. I was shocked. But it seems that most pro-choicers seem to be this way. They would rather insult the debater than debate.

fight a brutal 10 year civil war in wherever you live, over the issue of abortion, that results in full abolition of abortion, no exceptions

OR

Compromise with exceptions for rape, incest, disabilities(can be relatively harmless), life of the mother?

Now, some of you will fully agree. Some of you will say - "What about the women that might have a risk of dying?"

I'll be focusing on the latter.

If a woman during pregnancy gets a life threatening risk, the doctors will always try to save both the Mother and the Baby.

In Catholicism, there is a thing called double effect. It's about deciding whether if something that causes both good and bad is morally permissible.

Let's say a pregnant woman has an aggressive uterine cancer. If you do not do anything, both dies.

If we are only allowing abortion (killing a baby) for such cases, then that means we are allowing to kill the baby for the mother to live, or, simply, we are doing evil (killing baby) to produce a good result (saving the Mother's life).

The principle will only say that this is permissible:

Saving the mother via the surgery, even if the baby dies. Or, simply, doing good (surgery) to produce a good result (safe mother), even if something bad happens as a side effect (the baby's death.)

TL;DR: Allowing abortion when a pregnancy is life threatening is not pro life because you are still ending life. Inaction also risks two lives. However, if a medical procedure goes well, you have saved a life, and, regretably, a life ended not because you ended it, but as a side effect of a good you did, which was saving the mother via medical procedures.

"I don’t know what I did to deserve a child with down syndrome, but what ever it was.. I am sure glad I did it!"

Im looking for a secular argument for why the killing of humans(in general) is wrong but the killing of other animal species is not? Why do atheists believe its wrong to kill humans yet still eat meat? Im assuming the person im talking to is an atheist, and probably a vegan aswell.

Of course, I am christian so I do have my religious reasons for thinking human life is inherently more wrong to take than an animal's. But even when I was the least religious, it was always natural to me that killing humans was wrong, I just cant articulate why.

I do have argumentation for the last bit, just not why human life should be valued over an animal's. Id like to hear what yall think.

This has to be worse than "clump of cells" right?

We all want to protect the most vulnerable humans that do not have a voice. How do we just allow the pro-abortionists movement to treat us this way? It should be US yelling at them for murdering the unborn.

Embrace the awesome power of motherhood.

I posted this on my personal social media, but I'll leave this here, and make a follow up comment related to abortion:

From November 2021 to January 2022, I was hospitalized at McLean Hospital in Massachusetts in a residential treatment program to treat extreme treatment resistant OCD. If you have been reading the news, you will know that Lindsay Clancy was hospitalized at that same hospital only a few weeks before she killed her children. I have been on 9 of the 13 medicines that she was on.

It was the worst mental health treatment I ever received. The therapy sessions mostly consisted of the therapist being hard on me for minor screw-ups and threatening to kick me out of the program early for not improving enough.

Nonetheless, I am convinced that she is guilty. Two things can be true at once. From my experience, I can tell that the medical community of Massachusetts failed her and her kids big time. I almost committed suicide around that period myself.

However, I also believe that she is guilty because there is no solid proof that she was psychotic. She told many medical professionals about hearing voices, but she did not do so until after the murders. She also told medical professionals that she asked her mom if others could hear her own thoughts. Again, she most likely did not tell any medical professional until after the murders. When questioned on the stand by a doctor who talked to Clancy, her own mother did not tell the court that she displayed symptoms of thought broadcasting.

The sudden improvement in her symptoms (asking for an attorney after regaining consciousness) tells me that this was planned. She was definitely suffering from severe treatment resistant anxiety and depression, but those diagnoses do not meet the standard of not guilty by reason of insanity. Had I committed similar crimes in my suicidal state, I would support life in prison for myself.

Follow up comment:

In my opinion, the destigmatization of abortion directly made certain groups of progressives desensitized to child murder. Some pro-lifers have also been defending Clancy and vice versa, but the overwhelming majority of her defenders are pro-choice. We just saw a woman in Illinois kill her 2-year-old and then claim that it was voices. We also see cases of mothers who murder their newborns being met with sympathy that would have been unthinkable a decade ago.

In the early 20th century, feminists insisted that the destigmatization would not lead to more abortions. In the 1960's, we realized that was a lie. In the 1970's, feminists insisted that Roe v. Wade would not lead to elective late term abortion. In the 2020's, we realized that too was a lie. Now they tell us that elective late term abortion won't lead to infanticide becoming normalized. However, the Lindsay Clancy case, the Groningen protocol, and public reaction to Baby Doe cases tell me that this is also a lie. We just won't realize it until it is too late.

If you call yourself a compassionate person, you should spend your retirement creating a foundling hospital that rescues newborns that would have otherwise been killed. Those sadly used to be a thing in Christian countries.