Responses To Common post-Dobbs Objections

Responses to common post-Dobbs objections 1. LIE: Abortion bans also ban things like miscarriage care, ectopy pregnancy treatment, and early delivery when the mother’s life is at risk. a. The confusion is being intentionally spread by those trying to conflate life-ending abortion with lifesaving healthcare. b. The intent of abortion is to produce a dead child. Abortion is the direct and intentional killing of a preborn child. c. Miscarriage care, early delivery, and ectopic pregnancy treatments are done with the intent to save the mother (not produce a dead child) and do not directly kill the child (although the child may die as a consequence of being removed too early to survive outside the womb). Therefore they are not abortion, and no pro-life law views them as such. i. Dr. Christina Francis explaining why these things are not abortion according to an OB/GYN: https://www.instagram.com/p/CfRLZstjeyA/ ii. Dr. Brent Boles explaining that he’s never had to kill a child to save a mother: https://twitter.com/cbrentboles1/status/1532193446143852547 “30+ years of delivering thousands of babies and I’ve never had to intentionally kill a fetus to save a mom, and never lost a mom who would have been saved by an abortion.

It’s never needed to save a woman’s life, and saving women with miscarriages and ectopics also isn’t abortion.” iii. Even Planned Parenthood admits that the treatment for ectopic pregnancy is not an abortion:

Kristan Hawkins’ THREAD on Ectopic Pregnancy w/ Chemical Abortion Hypocrisy: Just as the abortion movement stands on the backs of the disabled, the poor, foster children, and rape victims to justify killing babies… Expect them to be on the prowl for women with ectopic pregnancies, hoping to exploit their experiences as a consequence of reversing Roe.

A doctor who refuses to treat an ectopic pregnancy for any reason should be liable for malpractice. There is no excuse. Removing an ectopic pregnancy is healthcare. Intentionally killing a child is not. And if you don’t see the difference, your moral compass is broken.

Speaking of abortion activists exploiting victims of ectopic pregnancy, did you know they used Covid lockdowns an excuse to withdraw ectopic pregnancy screenings from women seeking abortion pills? That’s right. Abortion activists rallied for changes to make sure women would not be screened for ectopic pregnancies.

If someone tells you pro-lifers are turning a blind eye to ectopic pregnancy, remind them that it was our side fighting for women to be screened for ectopic pregnancy before being given drugs that kill them when ectopic goes undiagnosed. Protect women from abortion predators.

2. LIE: Outlawing abortion will harm the economy a. Even if it did, it would still be the right thing to do b. But the fact is, the economy is harmed by abortion – not pro-life laws. i. The Joint Economic Committee Republicans released a report on June 15, 2022, that found that abortion killed nearly 1/3 of the economy in 2019. From the report: •

JEC Republicans estimate that the economic cost of abortion in 2019 alone—due to the loss of nearly 630,000 unborn lives—was at least $6.9 trillion, or 32 percent of GDP. o

•

JEC Republicans estimate that the economic cost of abortion due the loss of unborn lives is 425 times larger than the earnings loss mothers would be expected to incur when having a child. o

•

This economic cost estimate relies on standard methodologies used by federal government agencies to quantify the benefits of policies that affect mortality risks.

We apply the same methodology to abortion, which increases the risk of mortality to unborn babies.

Earnings of the average mother fall by approximately $26,000 over the first six years of her first child’s life. If each abortion prevents maternal earnings from falling, all abortions in 2019 could save mothers $16.2 billion in earnings over the next six years.

However, the JEC’s $6.9 trillion cost of abortion estimate far outweighs these projected earnings benefits.

Abortion imposes external costs on society not reflected in JEC Republicans’ $6.9 trillion cost estimate. In the long run, abortion shrinks the labor force, stunts innovation, and limits economic growth. It also weakens the solvency of social insurance programs like Social Security and Medicare that rely on workers to support a growing elderly population.

3. LIE: The Dobbs ruling sets precedent for the repeal of Supreme Court allowances on gay marriage, contraception, interracial marriage, etc.

Majority opinion: PAGE 13: Roe’s defenders characterize the abortion right as similar to the rights recognized in past decisions involving matters such as intimate sexual relations, contraception, and marriage, but abortion is fundamentally different, as both Roe and Casey acknowledged, because it destroys what those decisions called “fetal life” and what the law now before us describes as an “unborn human being.”

PAGES 71-72: “Finally, the dissent suggests that our decision calls into question Griswold, Eisenstadt, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Post, at 4–5, 26–27, n. 8. But we have stated unequivocally that “[n]othing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”

“We have also explained why that is so: rights regarding contraception and same-sex relationships are inherently different from the right to abortion because the latter (as we have stressed) uniquely involves what Roe and Casey termed “potential life.” Roe, 410 U. S., at 150 (emphasis deleted); Casey, 505 U. S., at 852.

“Therefore, a right to abortion cannot be justified by a purported analogy to the rights recognized in those other cases or by “appeals to a broader right to autonomy.” It is hard to see how we could be clearer. Moreover, even putting aside that these cases are distinguishable, there is a further point that the dissent ignores: Each precedent is subject to its own stare decisis analysis, and the factors that our doctrine instructs us to consider like reliance and workability are different for these cases than for our abortion jurisprudence.”

Kavanaugh’s Concurrence: PAGE 133: “First is the question of how this decision will affect other precedents involving issues such as contraception and marriage—in particular, the decisions in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479 (1965); Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U. S. 438 (1972); Loving v. Virginia, 388 U. S. 1 (1967); and Obergefell v.

Hodges, 576 U. S. 644 (2015). I emphasize what the Court today states: Overruling Roe does not mean the overruling of those precedents, and does not threaten or cast doubt on those precedents.”

4. LIE: Legal abortion is needed in cases of fetal anomaly / “fetal diagnosis” Abortion is not a solution for babies with any diagnosis or deemed “incompatible with life.”

That in itself is a dehumanizing term. And nothing renders someone more “incompatible” with life than dismembering, poisoning, or lethally injecting him or her. Doctors must stop ableism in medicine by committing to caring for their patients, born and preborn. It is not healthcare to kill someone. Period.

Perinatal Hospice exists to assist families of children who are not expected to live long after birth. A dignified delivery, familial bonding, palliative care, and funeral arrangements should be offered to every family in such a situation, and that is what Perinatal Hospice exists to do.

PerinatalHospice.org is where anyone can go to find the nearest perinatal hospice. Spread the word.

5. LIE: We need abortion because Foster Care is already overwhelmed / “Show me all the children YOU’VE adopted” When pro-aborts try to use foster children to justify dismembering babies (just like they use rape victims, disabled children, and impoverished women), they once again do not know what they are talking about.

Let’s get one thing clear: Foster care is not an “orphanage” system. The goal of foster care is reunification with the family of origin.

According to Bethany Christian Services: When children are in foster care, they typically have regular, supervised visits with their parents.

As parents progress toward their assigned goals, the reunification process begins with unsupervised visits, overnight visits, and weekend visits. Once the child(ren) return home, parents work with a social worker who provides in-home services and additional support to help the parents and child(ren) make a smooth transition.

Most of the children in foster care are not eligible for adoption.

According to the Adoption Network: Of the over 400,000 children in foster care in the U.S., 114,556 cannot be returned to their families and are waiting to be adopted. Among these children, males outnumber females, African American children are disproportionately represented, and over half are 6 years old or older.

For the approximately 1 in 4 foster children who are eligible for adoption, practicing Christians are the most likely group to step up and adopt and foster the children most in need of families.

According to CAFO (the Christian Alliance for Orphans) • • • •

Barna Research has found that practicing Christians are more than twice as likely to adopt as the general population.

These findings also showed that practicing Christians were more likely to adopt older children, children with special needs, and other children considered “hard to place.”

Practicing Christians were also nearly three times more likely to have seriously considered foster care. So it is not surprising that Pew Research found that 65 percent of non-kin foster parents attend religious services weekly – compared to 39 percent for the general population.

When actively recruited and organized and supported, this service can have a profound impact not just on individual children, but system wide. For example, in Arkansas, more than 40% of foster homes are recruited by a single faith-based group – the CALL of Arkansas.

Groups like the Dave Thomas Foundation exist specifically to connect children in foster care with adoptive families so that they do not age out of the system alone. Every child deserves a forever family to call their own, whether that is the family of origin or an adoptive one.

6. LIE: Most Americans support abortion.

What Americans REALLY think should be legal will now be proven by how they now VOTE in their states.

A Trafalgar Group poll last month showed less than 12% of Americans support abortions to birth… which is what Roe allowed.

According to analysis by the New York Post: Scientific advances showing us detailed ultrasound photos inside the womb, and allowing premature babies to survive at 25 weeks, have changed the equation. Most Americans want reasonable restrictions with compassionate exceptions to safeguard the mother’s life and in the cases of rape and incest — which Planned Parenthood’s own research arm, the Guttmacher Institute, says is less than 1% of abortions.

What’s more, a Rasmussen poll last month showed 48% of voters said they would approve of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, and 45% would disapprove. Among Democratic voters, 33% said they would approve.

And a Fox News poll found 54% of voters supported state laws banning abortion at 15 weeks, such as in Mississippi, where the Supreme Court case originated.