www.thegospelcoalition.org
How to Understand the Debate About Late-Term Abortion
In the recent presidential debate with vice president Kamala Harris, former president Donald Trump said, “Her vice-presidential pick [Minnesota governor Tim Walz] says abortion in the ninth month is absolutely fine. He also says execution after birth, it’s execution, no longer abortion, because the baby is born, is okay.”
This line introduced the under-discussed issues of late-term abortion and the status of infants born alive after an attempted abortion. Unfortunately, Trump’s propensity for overstatement and infelicity with language undermined the substance of his point. This allowed Linsey Davis, a moderator of the debate, to interject by saying, “There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it’s born.”
Davis is correct in that there’s no state where this is legal. That would be homicide. The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 ensures such a child would be protected by law. But it is legal to allow a baby to die after a failed abortion attempt, such as by withholding medical care. Last year, 210 House Democrats even voted against a bill requiring medical care for babies born alive after an abortion attempt.
Similarly, Walz didn’t explicitly say that “abortion in the ninth month is absolutely fine,” which allowed some “fact-checkers” to say Trump’s claim was false. But what Walz did do was sign a bill that allows abortion at any time during pregnancy. Nine states (Alaska, Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, New Jersey, Oregon, Vermont) and the District of Columbia allow abortion even in the ninth month.
Yet despite this easily verifiable information, many Americans remain completely ignorant about the status of late-term abortion. A prime example is the NAACP, which on the night of the debate posted on social media, “For the record: You cannot have an abortion in the 9th month. You cannot have an abortion after birth. If we didn’t keep banning books, maybe we wouldn’t have to clear that up.”
Four Perspectives on Late-Term Abortion
This incident underscores the need for a more detailed understanding of the various perspectives that shape public opinion and policy on abortion. It’s helpful to examine four primary viewpoints that dominate the abortion discourse, especially regarding late-term procedures. These perspectives each bring distinct philosophical, emotional, and practical considerations to the table. Understanding these viewpoints is thus crucial for engaging meaningfully in the ongoing debate surrounding abortion in America.
1. Sanctity of Life View
This view holds that human life begins at conception and is sacred from that moment onward. It relies on a philosophically consistent principle. Proponents argue the unborn child has an inherent right to life at all stages of development, from conception to birth. They oppose abortion at any stage, believing that ending a pregnancy is equivalent to ending a human life.
Under this view, the stage of pregnancy at which abortion occurs carries little to no additional moral weight. An apt analogy is the killing of innocent people in their sleep—it’d be equally wrong whether done at midnight (soon after falling asleep) or at 7 a.m. (close to waking time). Similarly, abortion is considered equally wrong whether performed early or late in pregnancy.
The key tenet is that the unborn have intrinsic value, independent of their developmental stage, others’ desires, or external circumstances. This view often aligns with religious beliefs but can also stem from secular philosophical positions on human rights and the value of life.
2. Wanted Baby View
This perspective is rooted in an intuitive understanding that “babies” (primarily referring to newborns and infants) are inherently good and valuable. The value of the unborn increases as they become more “baby-like” and emotionally resonant with our idea of newborns.
The unborn have intrinsic value, independent of their developmental stage, others’ desires, or external circumstances.
This view can overlap with both pro-life and pro-choice perspectives. Some holding this view oppose all abortions because pregnancy, if unimpeded, has a high probability of resulting in a baby. Others may support legal protections only in later stages of pregnancy, such as after “viability,” when the unborn child is more developed. For example, at around 12 weeks an unborn child can suck her thumb and at 18 weeks she starts being able to hear sounds, such as her mother’s heartbeat.
The pro-life movement has long understood that this view is prevalent among those who self-identify as pro-life. This is why graphic images of the unborn aborted late in pregnancy were once considered an effective means of swaying public opinion. It also helps explain why many who oppose abortion may still support IVF, as the resulting children are “wanted” and thus have high extrinsic value.*
Under this view, the unborn’s value is largely extrinsic, derived from being wanted either by the birth parents or potential adoptive parents. The emotional resonance with “baby-like” features plays a significant role in determining when legal protections should apply, which is why many who hold this view support restrictions on late-term abortion.
3. Emergency Birth Control View
This view is deeply rooted in modern perspectives on sexuality and autonomy. It contrasts with the orthodox Christian view of sex and aligns more with secular views that sex should ideally be free from unwanted entanglements or long-term consequences.
Proponents see abortion as part of a continuum of birth control methods, which can start before or during sex and continue through pregnancy. The term “birth control,” coined by Margaret Sanger in 1914, encompasses both contraception (before pregnancy) and abortion (after pregnancy).
While this view theoretically allows for abortion at any stage, most adherents put limits on when it should no longer be a legitimate option, often due to emotional factors similar to those in the Wanted Baby View. There’s no consensus on the exact time limit, but many (such as Trump) agree that six weeks is too short, as a woman may not yet be aware of her pregnancy.
A “grace period” is often advocated, allowing time for a woman to become aware of her pregnancy and obtain an abortion. The unspoken agreement is that once a pregnancy is noticeable to outside observers (usually between 12 and 20 weeks), the legitimate time for obtaining an abortion has passed. This aligns with why in the public mind “late-term abortion” often refers to procedures at or after the 20th week of pregnancy.
4. Bodily Autonomy View
This view holds that a woman should have absolute autonomy over what happens with or inside her body, particularly regarding the choice to become or remain pregnant. It shares similarities with the Sanctity of Life View in its attempt to apply a philosophical principle with absolute consistency.
Under this view, considerations such as the unborn’s moral status, emotional resonance, or value (whether intrinsic or extrinsic) are secondary concerns that cannot override a woman’s right to bodily autonomy. This perspective supports unrestricted access to abortion at any stage of pregnancy, including late-term procedures.
Proponents argue that forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will violates her fundamental human rights. They contend that the right to bodily autonomy supersedes any rights of the unborn, regardless of the baby’s stage of development or viability.
This view often emphasizes the physical, emotional, and social effects of pregnancy and childbirth on women, arguing that only the individual woman can decide whether to accept these effects. It rejects the idea that the state or any other entity has the right to compel a woman to use her body to sustain another life against her will.
Why We Talk Past One Another
With this framework in mind, it becomes clearer why people so often seem to talk past one another on this issue.
Sanctity of Life View: The hallmark is realism. This group is often the most informed about the reality of abortion in America and rarely surprised by “new” information about the procedure or its prevalence. They’re also less concerned about when an abortion occurs and so are less shocked by the fact that an unborn child can be killed closer to his time of birth. Their consistent philosophical stance means they approach the issue with a clear-eyed understanding of the facts, regardless of how emotionally challenging they may be. They tend to be well-versed in both the biological development of the unborn and the legal landscape surrounding abortion at all stages.
Wanted Baby View: The hallmark is sentimentality. This group is most swayed by emotional appeals and imagery that humanize the unborn, particularly as the unborn child develops more recognizably human features. They’re likely to be deeply affected by ultrasound images, stories of fetal development, and narratives about adoption. Their position can sometimes appear inconsistent because it’s based more on emotional resonance than on strict philosophical principles. They may struggle with early-term abortions intellectually but find late-term abortions much more distressing due to the more developed appearance of the child in the womb.
Emergency Birth Control View: The hallmark is incredulity. This group is the most surprised by the idea that elective abortion can occur late in a pregnancy. They believe that since the primary reason for abortion is emergency birth control (presumably after a contraceptive has failed), the only late-term abortions that could or would occur must be medically necessary. They therefore assume any restrictions during this stage would threaten the mother’s health, since no one would “choose” to have an abortion in the last months of pregnancy. This view often leads to a disconnect in discussions about late-term abortions, as they may dismiss factual information about elective late-term procedures as implausible or exaggerated.
Bodily Autonomy View: The hallmark is indifference. This group is the least likely to be concerned with late-term abortions. The child’s welfare and the outcome of the pregnancy are secondary issues, much less important than preserving women’s “reproductive freedom.” They tend to view debates about fetal development or the specifics of abortion procedures as irrelevant distractions from the core issue of a woman’s right to control her body. This stance can sometimes appear callous to those with different views, as it prioritizes the principle of bodily autonomy over considerations that others find morally significant.
Understanding these different perspectives and their characteristics helps us see why debates on abortion, especially regarding late-term procedures, often result in people talking past each other. Each group approaches the issue with fundamentally different priorities, emotional responses, and baseline assumptions about the nature and prevalence of abortion at various stages of pregnancy.
How to Engage with Each Viewpoint
The most consistently Christian perspective is the Sanctity of Life view. To effectively persuade those holding the other three views, pro-life Christians should tailor their approach to address each one’s specific concerns and characteristics.
Wanted Baby View: We should focus on connecting emotional resonance and the continuity of human development to human dignity and the intrinsic value of life. This group is most swayed by vivid imagery and personal stories that highlight the unborn’s humanity at all stages. To emphasize how quickly human features develop, share fetal development information and ultrasound images from the earliest stages. Bridge the emotional gap by using consistent language that humanizes the unborn, such as referring to a “baby” or “child” instead of a “fetus.” Stories of premature babies surviving at earlier stages of development can also be powerful. The key is to emphasize the arbitrary nature of distinguishing value based on development or “wantedness” and to appeal to people’s intuition about the value of all human life regardless of circumstances.
Emergency Birth Control View: Address their incredulity with factual information about late-term abortions while acknowledging their concerns about women’s health and well-being. Clear, sourced statistics on the reasons for and frequency of late-term abortions can be eye-opening for this group. Explain how many late-term abortions aren’t medically necessary, while also discussing alternatives to abortion that address underlying concerns such as support for mothers and adoption. Emphasizing how the Sanctity of Life view protects both mother and child can help align this perspective with their concerns for women’s welfare. Engage people on the ethics of using abortion as birth control at any stage—this can provoke thoughtful reflection on the implications of their view.
Bodily Autonomy View: The challenge lies in questioning the notion of absolute bodily autonomy and presenting the unborn child as a separate individual deserving of rights. This requires engaging in philosophical arguments about competing rights and exploring when rights can be limited to protect others. Present scientific evidence of the distinct genetic identity of the unborn from conception. Discuss the logical extensions of absolute bodily autonomy and their societal implications in order to encourage critical thinking about this principle’s limits. Address concerns about women’s well-being by discussing support systems and alternatives to abortion, as this shows that the Sanctity of Life view isn’t indifferent to the challenges women face.
Meaningful Dialogue for Meaningful Change
Regardless of which view is being addressed, certain general principles apply. Starting with common ground—the shared value of human life in some form—can create a foundation for dialogue. Using scientific accuracy when presenting information about fetal development and abortion procedures can lend credibility to the discussion. Similarly, demonstrating how the Sanctity of Life view offers a consistent ethical framework across all stages of human development can appeal to those seeking logical coherence in their beliefs.
The most consistently Christian perspective is the Sanctity of Life view.
Throughout these conversations, it’s essential to show compassion by acknowledging the difficult circumstances that can lead women to consider abortion as well as offering life-affirming alternatives. Address underlying concerns by discussing societal support systems, adoption, and other resources that can help tackle the root causes of Americans supporting abortion as a “necessary evil.” Encourage critical thinking and invite others to examine their views and the logical conclusions of their positions—this may lead them to meaningful self-reflection and possibly to a change of heart.
Above all, patience and respect are paramount. Changing deeply held beliefs takes time, and respectful dialogue is essential for persuasion. By tailoring the approach to each view’s characteristics while maintaining the core principles of the Sanctity of Life perspective, we can engage in more effective and meaningful dialogue and help create a culture that values all human life.
*IVF is considered by many to be a fundamental good since it facilitates the creation of a most valuable good—babies. The children created by the process are almost, by definition, “wanted” and thus have high extrinsic value (even apart from whatever intrinsic value they may have as post-birth human beings). But the embryos destroyed in the IVF process are viewed differently. They have some extrinsic value as long as the parents believe they’ll want to implant them in the future. But the embryos often lack the emotional resonance because, if they’re seen at all, they appear as a mere “clump of cells” and lack the fingers and toes seen in ultrasound images later in the pregnancy.
New Posts (Home)
ChatBox
Popular Posts 
Game Zone
Top PodCasts
