Rachel Held Evans is a “progressive Christian” who argues for the anti-religious freedom aspects of Obamacare via Privilege and The Pill. Along the way she makes several arguments on behalf of the pro-abortion lobby, such as this comment about when life begins:
Rabbit trail: The fact that a woman’s body naturally rejects hundreds of fertilized eggs in her lifetime raises some questions in my mind about where we draw the line regarding the personhood of a zygote. Do we count all those “natural abortions” as deaths? Did those zygotes have souls? Will I meet them in heaven? Honestly, the more I learn about the reproductive system, the harder it becomes for me to adamantly insist that I know for sure the exact moment when life begins. And it’s even harder for me to insist that everyone else agree.
But with arguments like that, “pro-lifers” like Held hand ammunition to the pro-abortion forces. That’s a great argument, unless your opponent has the ability to see the difference between A and B:
A. Human being dies of natural causes (inside or outside the womb)
B. Human being has skull crushed and limbs ripped off by a 3rd party (inside or outside the womb)
In other words, deliberate abortions are vastly different than fertilized eggs dying of natural causes, just as murders are vastly different from grandma dying peacefully in her bed.
Held and Co. also ignore the scientific fact that the unborn are unique, living human beings from fertilization. They have no excuse for missing that.
And even if we didn’t know when human life begins, shouldn’t we err on the side of life? If you thought that what you are about to do might destroy an innocent human life, shouldn’t you stop what you are doing? The “we don’t know when life beings” fallacy naturally leads to abortion on demand at any stage of pregnancy.
She was also wrong about abortions and “morning after” pills:
Andrew Walker and I have published a response over at the First Things website, and we argue that her essay is mistaken on a number of levels. For instance, Evans denies that “morning-after” pills have an abortifacient mechanism. Yet somehow she misses that the FDA label on Plan B’s package says otherwise. But you don’t have to believe me. You can read the label for yourself. Notice the second sentence in bold underneath “Other information” . . .
The pro-life movement does not need any help from faux-lifers like Held who make the arguments of pro-abortionists for them.
4 thoughts on “When “pro-lifers” make pro-abortion arguments”
I think Evans is about as much of a Christian as is Jim Wallis.
I prefer outright wolves like Spong and Currie over fake “orthodox” people like Held.
Sent from my iPhone
I read one of the blogs you posted and she said some women have to decide between paying the waterbill or contraceptives. If you have a tough time making that decision then you’ve got other problems.
I really dislike the term “fertilized egg.” It’s a misnomer. There is no such thing as a “fertilized egg.” At the moment of conception, both the sperm and egg cease to exist. There is no longer an egg to carry the label “fertilized.”