Tired of the pro-choice lie

[Honesting]

I keep seeing people bring this up again, especially after Charlie Kirk’s assassination, that he once said if his 10-year-old daughter became pregnant through rape he’d insist she carry the baby. People call it misogynistic and vile. To be clear, that’s not my view and I’m not here to argue the pro-life case.

I actually have mixed feelings about abortion. I'm okay with the MAP and not okay with abortion up to the point of delivery. Where to draw the line is something I haven't decided yet.

What I do want to say is that it’s dishonest to pretend CK's position comes from hatred of women. The pro-life stance is very consistent and, internally, very coherent. If you genuinely believe an unborn child is a human being with rights, then ending its life is always wrong, no matter how it was conceived. We’d never allow a raped woman to kill her newborn, even if it was the product of rape. So if you see the foetus as having equal rights, then by that same logic, it shouldn’t matter whether conception was through rape.

I know the other side, and I understand it. I’m not dismissing the complexities. But the idea that the pro life argument is born of misogyny is simply false. It comes from a clear and reasonable moral framework: once human life begins, it carries human rights.

Yes. In particular, Stanford University in 2022 published a (widely reported) study in the Annals of Internal Medicine focusing on data from households in California over a 12 year period.

There are several others.

I do not agree with abortion. That is my view, I am allowed that view. Labelling a view as misogynistic is in my view wrong , I understand people do not agree with my view and accept that and know people make decisions and have views which are different based on their own life experiences etc. I stand by my view but do not think labelling a view is helpful , fair enough that’s some one’s view but it is not a fact.

If someone 'does not agree' that black people are equal to white people or thinks that eg interracial marriage is 'wrong' and shouldn't happen then that person's views are racist. Wouldn't you agree?

If you think it's wrong that women should be allowed bodily autonomy, your view is misogynistic.

You can hold whatever view you want, but those views can be bigoted and abhorrent, those views can be sexist and misogynistic, those views can be horrific to other people. Why wouldn't other people identify those views as what they are just to save your feelings?

If you’re Scottish, you should know much better than to regurgitate MAGA over here. MN isn’t a gun club.

I should know better? Than what, outline an argument on a discussion forum? Don't be ridiculous. Counter with an actual argument by all means, but who gives you the authority to tell other posters to shut up because you don't want other people to hear what they're saying?

I suppose the same reason people who feel abortion is morally wrong don't call it murder when they're trying to have a civilised discussion about it. It's about courtesy and being able to disagree in a way which allows us to continue to live alongside one another. It's of critical importance because we are rapidly moving towards a society where people would like to see those who disagree with violently attacked for their views.

Do you see an outpouring of support for gun ownership on here?

We need to be able to identify misogyny (and racism, homophobia, ableism etc) and not skirt around them for fear of upsetting people. It's a very different thing to violently attacking people, unless you think that words themselves are violence - which I don't, but recognise words can incite violence. However, we can't say 'ok, we will pretend that misogynistic views are nothing to do with misogyny in case those holding those views are hurt directly or indirectly by us pointing out the misogyny'.

Do anti-choicers keep the word 'murder' out of civilised discussions? No, because it's the linchpin of their argument. It's here on the thread - anti-abortionists take their stance because they see abortion as the taking of life. They ignore the women who die when abortion is restricted, and it is important that we are able to point out that when you don't mind women dying in service of your views then you are misogynistic. That's not uncivilised, and it isn't an incitement to violence.

That we have a rapid escalation of violence is because of easy access to guns. It's so easy for people in America to be able to inflict lethal violence and therefore it's inevitable that more people will die. So instead of silencing those who want to be able to point out misogyny where it exists, take away the guns and let people talk.

Discounting, of course, all the imaginary Juniper friends who are busy being recruited from a bot-farm as I write.

I’m not going to debate gun ownership, as it’s irrelevant to me. Long may it remain so. No party that wants to relax gun control will have my vote.

Hilariously, a Farage supporter tried to get a Parliamentary petition going to reduce gun controls. It got a grand total of 114 votes. More people than that still put crochet dollies over their loo rolls.

Judge your audience.

petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/59704

I have no idea what that has to do with what I said

"They ignore the women who die when abortion is restricted, and it is important that we are able to point out that when you don't mind women dying in service of your views then you are misogynistic."

This is really an interesting argument. Because no societies actually survive the legalisation of abortion in the long term. The demographic changes brought about by the use of technology cause the misery of an inverse and ageing population, and ultimately - its final demise. But you likely approve of this

If a society can't survive women having rights - if it can only thrive from the suffering and oppression of women - then it isn't worth saving.

But in reality, I don't believe abortion is a threat to society. I think living in a world where children routinely get gunned down in their classrooms will bring us to destruction a whole lot quicker than women having control of their own bodies and their own lives.

If the destination is the same, can you provide any coherent argument why the journey matters?

You don't believe abortion is a threat, because it's happening slowly, like frogs being boiled alive. But look at the demographic changes, no society which mainstreams abortion maintains a replacement level fertility rate. That puts a growing burden on young people and the children of tomorrow that makes school shootings look like the good old days

You aren't just talking about access to abortion when you're talking about 'replacement level fertility rates' (and we can hear the dogwhistle from space!). You're talking about women having education, opportunities and access to birth control as well. Because as soon as women have access to all those things, not just abortion, they choose to have fewer children.

If what is required for society to sustain itself is to keep women in subjugation, uninformed, disempowered and forced to keep having babies they don't want then I would argue that journey does matter because women are 50% of the population and they deserve to be more than brood mares in order for men to live the kind of life they want.

We can change the way society functions and make it more equal and then we can continue. We can have a world that includes abortion and allows the human race to continue. The major existential threats to our survival are climate change, nuclear war, more deadly pandemics and the development of superintelligent AI. What we need to be doing rather than trying to force women to bear unwanted children is tackling climate change deniers and regulating tech companies, developing more vaccines and countering health disinformation, coordinating global health agencies to work together and funding their research - all positive solutions that would offer hope for the future of humanity. Because what hope is there in a vision of a world that trundles along on our current trajectory but also denies women their rights, dignity and freedom?

Human nature is human nature. Give us all a piece and let us have at it then 😂

Not sure what that means, BlueJuniper. But I think a fundamental part of human nature is a desire for autonomy and for control over your own life, and there isn't a non-misogynistic argument for denying that to women.

I also think we have to be alive to the fact that the Trump political philosophy is anti women, pro choice , and believes women should be at home. That philosophy will be travelling to a town near any of us, and loudly. We need to fight that hard.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/sep/27/trump-tylenol-sexism-tough-it-out

Also

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2025/sep/21/fascism-women-homemaker-trad-wife

I respect the views you hold with regard to abortion.

Your comments about my view being "bigoted" and "misogynistic" show intolerance and lack maturity, we should be able to have disagreement without resorting to name calling etc. I would agree that it is not right of those who anti abortion to refer to this as 'murder' and would also criticise the use of emotive language in that instance.

You can't get around a viewpoint that believes in stripping rights from women being misogynistic. There is nothing immature about pointing out that when you restrict access to abortion, women suffer and die in greater numbers. So to advocate for something that causes harm to women is misogynistic.

I wouldn't respect a racist viewpoint. A view is not worthy of respect just because someone holds it, and you aren't immune to criticism because it's something you believe. What you believe causes suffering to women.

It also is not 'name calling' to identify misogyny. Name calling would be a personal insult.

I don’t think it is possible to have a discussion with someone is t wing disingenuous. As I said I respect your view although I disagree and would expect the same courtesy.

If you posted that you don't believe black people should have the right to vote, you'd be identified as racist. If you posted that you don't think gay people should have the right to marry, you'd be identified as homophobic. Do you think that those views command respect and that a person expressing them should be exempt from being called racist or homophobic?

So, when you post that you don't believe women should have bodily autonomy and the right to healthcare, you will be identified as misogynistic. And I don't respect a viewpoint that advocates to strip women of their rights.

The discussion is about abortion, the points you make relate to different issues and subjects.
As I said I respect your views and expect mine to be respected. There is clearly no point continuing a discussion with someone who doesn’t understand that other views are valid and are based on different thoughts and values.

Cultures that don’t practice abortion have, in history, (tragically) been cultures that practice infanticide at or shortly after birth. Japan is a case in point.

Japan - never a feminist country, by any measure - was also one of the first countries to experience a demographic crash. It happened when Japan adopted a Western economic model: for the first time, people had to outcompete each other simply to survive. Parents curbed their family sizes, by reflex. In the DDR by contrast, where women had childcare, they rose.

Look at a graph of UK or US birthrates: they plummet each time there is an economic shock. Poor people, it is true, have always had lots of children, but people who lose their living-standards do the opposite.

And yet it’s the right that is trying to foist a fire-and-rehire, boom and bust economy on the rest of the world, and shrieking about The Wimmins when its ruinous outcome becomes apparent.

Communism collapsed; free market liberalism, practiced US-style, is crushing us too. We need to handle our economy in a more intelligent way. Perhaps - just perhaps - respecting the needs of caregivers might be a start. Has anyone on here read “Doughnut Economics”? I keep meaning to.

Meanwhile, keep on howling from (ahem) “rural Scotland”, Juniper. You’ve got bills to pay too, and you sure do work hard.