The pro-life alternatives to Planned Parenthood employ scare tactics, lies

[Marokai Backbeat]

The folks that the "pro-life movement" attracts are pretty effective at pushing me away from a message I would otherwise be receptive to. What do morning-after pills and freely available contraceptives have to do with wanting to protect babies? Why do so many people who call themselves "pro-life" make utterly misogynistic and generally offensive comments about how a woman's body works, and obsess over abstinence programs being forced on schools? Why do these same people generally come from a side of the American political spectrum wherein there is widespread opposition to expanding healthcare and social services for young families and babies?

This is why I just generally can't take that entire movement seriously, and it actively pisses me off because this is yet another example of the American right-wing just being stupid and pissing away a chance to have a decent point of opposition. I genuinely don't get why so many people who call themselves pro-life take such bizarre and puritanical positions that only half-way have anything to do with abortion.

If the pro-life movement simply maintained their broad opposition to most abortions but was actually in favor of contraceptive use, didn't act like they were generally ickified by sex, and supported creating and expanding greater programs for family planning, adoption agencies, food and healthcare programs for infant care, and really made themselves all about "protecting vulnerable life" it would be incredibly hard to argue with from the perspective of other politicians. Support for pro-life individuals and causes would shoot up dramatically. I'd be tempted to count myself among them.

But I guess to the right-wing, such things really don't matter, do they? If you're getting the votes, that's all you need.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Again, the fact that the "pro-life" movement only cares about the welfare of babies when it allows them to pass laws restricting the sexual freedom of women is incredibly telling with regards to their real goals.

Do you have any basis for this claim, or is it just convenient for you to believe?

Please explain why the average pro-life Republican is opposed to freely available contraceptives? Or why they're nowhere to be found whenever adoption agencies, or family planning organizations need funding? Or why they tend to forcefully oppose expanding healthcare and food services for children or the poor? Or what the bizarrely insecure objections to comprehensive sex education comes from, and where the reluctance to even talk about or understand sex comes from?

Actually, don't bother, because I don't want to hear the fake and absurdly naive Inks-ian reasons pulled out of your ass. The fact is, American "pro-life" conservatism is obsessively focused on banning abortions and supporting abstinence, and practically nothing else. Such behavior makes no sense, and instead just comes across as prudish/misogynistic, and does little more than encourage unsafe abortions and further pregnancies. The movement itself fashions itself as "supporting life" to the point of serious government intervention, and yet, seems utterly unconcerned by the welfare of a child after the point of birth, and actively supports or opposes a range of policies that only leads to more unsafe sex and unplanned pregnancies.

It doesn't help that the movement is riddled with old white men that make ghastly and offensive comments about abortion, rape, or the way a woman's body works in general, and smacks of nothing more than a vapid and shallow way to rile up religious voters at the expense of their economic self interest.