Let’s start from the beginning: March 17th, 2017. Young conservative icon Tomi Lahren appeared on the somewhat popular daytime talk show, “The View.” To provide some insight, Tomi Lahren was going to discuss Trump’s recent travel ban, treatment of women, and more. You can see her full appearance here.
Before I go on, the record should show that during this interview Tomi Lahren carried herself both maturely and efficiently. I applaud her performance. That being said, I’ll get to the point.
A little after seven minutes into Lahren’s appearance, when the treatment of women was being discussed, host Sunny Hostin asked Lahren about her stance on abortion as a conservative, citing the fact that Lahren considers herself “pro-choice.” Lahren confirmed that she is in fact pro-choice, providing an extraneous example when she mentioned guns, saying, “you can stay out of my guns and my body.” This statement seems to imply that she remains pro-choice to evict double standards from her advocacy for limited government. That implication is also found in Lahren’s intense anti-abortion comments wrought within her spot on The Blaze: Final Thoughts. So that delivers us with the million dollar question: “Is there a difference to be found by conservatives between pro-life and pro-abortion in the name of limited government?” Some millennial conservatives believe there is. But of course with the pro-life position being a core foundation of the Conservative movement, Lahren and those concurring with her opinion on this issue have gotten quite a bit of flack for “misrepresenting true conservatism.” Since this issue is contested rigorously in our contemporary society, I decided to take a poll myself. Having a majority of avid pro-life followers who do not see a compromise on the matter, I urged them to not only vote, but to share the poll to avoid potentially biased results. Upon the poll concluding, I discovered that no dramatic bias could have occurred. In fact, the results were surprisingly close. Forty-seven percent of voters said there is indeed a difference between pro-abortion and pro-choice. Fifty-three percent said there’s no way to support the choice without supporting the gruesome decision to terminate the pregnancy. As this tweet from @TheHirsty put it: “It would be like being against slavery, but for it politically. If someone truly believes abortion is murder or wrong, you wouldn’t support its legality.”
I took my Twitter research a step further and recorded direct statements from conservatives on both sides of the debate (some are summarized below).
Bailey Nicole (@bailnicole) left her take plain and simple: “If you are a pro-choice conservative, you are not a conservative at all.”
Victoria Silver (@viccsilver) wrote, “In short, abortion is always going to exist, legal or not. I take a pro-choice stance for the safety of women, so abortion can always be accessed safely and legally, and with the use of comprehensive sexual education and accessible contraception, rarely.”
This was an entire aspect of the argument in and of itself: women’s safety. But with abortion being a drastic and traumatic medical procedure, it almost feels silly to say normalizing this for us is, “for our own good.” Aside from this point of view, if you are personally against abortion, then you’ve acknowledged it’s a type of crime against humanity, and we can all admit that condoning crime for the convenience of the criminal is nothing but absurd.
Reagan McDonald (@reagansolitaire) wrote, “As a conservative, one of our key aspects is limited government. I want the government to stay out of my business with guns and also with my body. That is why I am pro-choice. I am not pro-choice because I believe in abortion. Pro-choice is supporting the right to have the choice for yourself and for others. After 24 weeks [the point at which it’s understood that a fetus can feel pain and function cognitively] I do not believe in abortion, for the safety of the fetus and the mother. If abortion never crosses the mind of a mother, good for her. But realistically, some women are not ready for children. I believe in pro-choice as a right as an American citizen, and as a woman.”
Sydney C. (@sydreneec) wrote, “It’s impossible to be personally against killing unborn babies but then believe other people should have the choice to. If you ignore the basic right to life, you shouldn’t call yourself a conservative. No other right is worth conserving if you can’t protect the most important one: life.”
If we put pro-life convictions aside, and strictly examine the argument from a “human rights” (ironically called so) perspective, we must admit the argument still falls short. The Constitution guarantees the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” for every American citizen, born or not. Those rights do not vary based on the convenience or inconvenience of the citizen’s existence. This tweet from anon @homelessbanter points out that this “our choice” argument neglects all other choices [including adoption agencies, private adoption, pregnancy help centers, etc.] available to pregnant women aside from abortion. It also deflects all personal responsibility from the mother and father for avoiding anti-pregnancy measures [birth control medication, condoms, etc.] that could have been ‘chosen’ before sexual intercourse. Furthermore, if one wants to avoid the risk of having to terminate a pregnancy at all costs, abstinence is an extremely viable and successful measure that can be adopted.
Devin Sena (@DevinSenaUI) wrote, “‘I hate abortion but support a woman’s right to choose’ is the equivalent of saying ‘I hate rape but support a man’s right to commit it’. Conservatives believe in traditional values and constitutional originalism, therefore it is entirely antithetical to conservatism to be ‘pro-choice’. Affirming abortion as murder, yet refusing to stand against the genocide of innocent Americans is an unconservative, unconstitutional, and cowardice position.”
As you can see, every angle of this debate is well thought out, precise, and logical, but only one side can exist without contradicting itself. The difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion can’t exist beyond the idea that “maybe human fetuses might not actually be humans fully deserving of human rights.” This idea is highly employed in the pro-abortion argument, so to acknowledge a difference between the two is charity. If you personally believe a fetus is human child, and you care about human rights, you’d be nearly incapable of finding yourself in this gray area of supporting the idea but not the action. If you believe this logic of finding a difference between the two will stand, you’re kidding yourself. We’ve heard all the reasoning behind this gray area, but none of it resonates like the sound of millions of children, because we all agree fetuses are human children being slaughtered in the name of convenience. This gray utopia of “rights are not just privileges earned by citizenship, but whatever course of action my convenience desires” must not be embraced as some newfound conservative ideology. Not only is the seductiveness of a pro-choice stance a slippery slope, but it directly implicates a matter of human morality and ethics that has caused the death of some fifty million American infants. Conservatives must hold fast to the first basic American right: the right to life.
Follow the author on Twitter