Gerrit, I know pro-lifers would say "Save the babies", but I want to hear from the pro-choicers.

Their argument is based on "what the woman wants".
Not her doctor, husband, relatives.
Certainly not a complete stranger.

But here complete strangers *have* to decide, and quickly.

The "logical" conclusion, in their brave new world where you have no right to exist until you're born, is that paramedics would *always refuse* to save the unborn.

Same if a woman died in labour, or from some disease while pregnant.

Sorry, woman dead. Unborn baby dies too.
Bag 'em and tag 'em!

Of course, the Choicers would never admit this repulsive inevitable conclusion of their "logic".
They know this would be totally unacceptable.

What of a woman in a coma?
Who became comatose *without knowing* she's three weeks pregnant!

Kept alive on life support, the baby keeps developing inside her.

She can't make a "choice".
The decision *must* be made by somebody else, without any knowledge of what the woman herself would want.

Should she be "forced" to continue the pregnancy?
"Forced" to have an abortion?

Enshrine a "woman's choice only" clause into law, and you could create dilemmas like these, where nobody else has the *right* to decide, yet somebody else *must* decide.

And if other people had the right to decide in these circumstances, why do they have no say in normal circumstances?

If a husband had the right to decide when his wife's dead or comatose, why does he have no say when she's alive or conscious?

Now, the Pro-Man Conspiracy.

Choicers attack their opponents for:
1. The large number of men against abortion (The large number of pro-choice men doesn't seem to be an equivalent problem.)
2. Some anti-abortionists are pro-capital punishment, pro-guns or pro-war.

The Choicers conclude Lifers are anti-female, and only thinking of male interests.
But if this were true, why would some be pro-capital punishment, pro-guns or pro-war?

It is predominantly *men* who are executed, shot or die in battle.

Why would a Pro-Man Conspiracy support policies that primarily kill *men*?!

Yet another example of their "logic".