I say "the worst" but in reality, they're all bad. The Abortion Industry has nothing on their side anymore: not science, not truth. They have talking points to win over the uninformed. That's all.
The one I particularly loathe is "My Body, My Choice". Stupid women love this one, but the stupidity is laughable. It's not your body, sweetheart. If it were your body, you could do what you like. Have your entire female organs removed, tattoo it up, pierce your entire face--I agree. Your choice.
But again. Not your body.
Your BABY'S body. Separate DNA, separate heartbeat, separate and unique set of fingerprints. Not yours. His. Or hers.
What other abortion talking points do you find stupid, laughable, both or other?
‘My body, my choice’ is in fact a perfectly appropriate and compelling argument, consistent with the Constitution, its case law, and the right to privacy:
“It is an inescapable biological fact that state regulation with respect to the child a woman is carrying will have a far greater impact on the mother's liberty[.] The effect of state regulation on a woman's protected liberty is doubly deserving of scrutiny in such a case, as the State has touched not only upon the private sphere of the family but upon the very bodily integrity of the pregnant woman.” (
Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)).
Consequently, as a settled, accepted fact of Constitutional law, a woman alone has the right to make decisions concerning her bodily integrity absent unwarranted interference from the state – decisions unmitigated by the embryo/fetus she is carrying.
Moreover, the notion that the embryo/fetus somehow ‘overrides’ a woman’s right to privacy is likewise as a fact of law wrong:
‘…an abortion is not "the termination of life entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection." Id., at 159. From this holding, there was no dissent, see id., at 173; indeed, no member of the Court has ever questioned this fundamental proposition. Thus, as a matter of federal constitutional law, a developing organism that is not yet a "person" does not have what is sometimes described as a "right to life." [n.2] This has been and, by the Court's holding today, remains a fundamental premise of our constitutional law governing reproductive autonomy.’ (
Casey, ibid)
The ‘argument,’ therefore, that a woman is somehow ‘enslaved’ by a developing organism not yet a person fails, devoid of merit and logic, and in no manner justifying the state’s effort to compel a woman to give birth against her will.