‘What If I hadn’t been born?’ question infuriates pro-abortionists

Rachael Larimore

A while back Slate senior editor Rachael Larimore, no dyed-in-the-wool pro-lifer, wrote a column titled, “Pro-Choicers Hate the “What if I Hadn’t Been Born” Question. Here’s Why” which touched off a flurry of comments.

And because she is not one of us, it made her trenchant observations all the more telling. Here is her beginning:

The pro-choice movement relies on a carefully crafted image to make its position seem responsible and caring: that women should be allowed to abort their unplanned pregnancies because unwanted children grow up poor, neglected, abused or some combination thereof. It can’t allow for the possibility that some “unwanted” children actually grow up in loving homes and become responsible, even successful, adults; or that couples who take responsibility for unplanned children can be as good of parents as couples who wait until they’re ready to have a family.

And when they are presented with evidence to the contrary, out comes the name-calling.

Pro-abortionists were furious.

Click here for more from National Right to Life.