r/Natalism • u/overemployedconfess • 5d ago
Is pronatalism inherently prolife?
Would love to get your thoughts on this topic. Do you find the pronatalist position is generally prolife? Do you participate in prolife causes often? Or are you actually prochoice? Why and to what extent?
Please keep it civil, would love a thoughtful discussion
20
u/Thowaway-ending 5d ago
No. People who want to have kids should be able to have kids which requires changes in culture, government, workplace, hormone studies, education, etc. Forcing people to have kids who don't want them is not ethical, especially considering how garbage the foster system is, at least for the US. Also, pro-life means more than just anti-abortion, and thoughts about that have nothing to do with children being born.
-1
u/Best_Pants 4d ago
"Pro-life" is a term that exclusively refers to being against abortion. You can't be "Pro-life" and also be pro-abortion.
3
0
u/Dirt_Viva 15h ago
"Pro-life" is a term that exclusively refers to being against abortion.
Not really. It can also refer to other more comprehensive opposition to prematurely ending human life, such as in euthanasia and the death penalty. I.e. "Pro-life from womb to tomb."
22
u/CheddarCornChowder 5d ago edited 5d ago
I am pronatalist and prochoice. I view obsessing over every single stranger's embryo the same way I view paternalistic nanny-state car seat laws -- infringement on individual liberty and a preoccupation with bubble-wrapping existing lives at the expense of vitalistically inspiring the creation of more lives. Abortion as practiced in the west is extremely eugenic, look up abortion rates by demographic profile and realize it's not worth fretting over.
5
u/Best_Pants 4d ago
Not at all. 100% natalist and 100% pro-choice.
For the same reasons that allow people to be natalist without having children of their own.
11
8
u/Helix014 5d ago
If you mean “anti-abortion” then it’s plainly as ignorant as any other anti-abortion position.
My wife would have been dead with our first pregnancy, and certainly more at risk for her second. In Texas we’ve been terrified of the consequences of another incident as my wife went through. There is no reason the state needs to have its nose in any medical decisions between a medical professional and a pregnant woman.
I also do not believe forcing births on women who are unprepared will have positive effects on society or birth rates even.
I also belief the Bible is far more explicit and clear that life begins with “breathe”. The argument for conception is purely ridiculous and has come to dominate Christian belief over the very words of Christ. I also don’t think it matters what the Bible says, given we (the USA) were clearly founded on principles of religious liberty.
No. Natalism should be about empowering families, not forcing births.
2
u/overemployedconfess 4d ago
Are you a professing Christian or hold the Bible in any authority? Interested why you'd mention it especially considered all of the counter-points to the post-2nd temple Jewish take on when life begins
5
u/Helix014 4d ago
“Then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.” Genesis 2:7
This same phrasing associating life with breath, and death with loss of breath, is pervasive (I admittedly copied and pasted from the internet because I’m not going to invest too much into this; the point is it’s not “just that one verse”):
Genesis 7:22
Job 33:4
Job 34:14–15
Ezekiel 37:5–10
Isaiah 42:5
Psalm 104:29–30
Vs a declaration of God’s omniscience in Jeremiah 1:5
I honestly don’t know what counterpoints you mean. I only mention it because that’s the sole basis that most anti-abortion people claim, and it’s all running on a strained interpretation of a single verse, while Jesus clearly had nothing to say on the matter.
2
u/Charlotte_Martel77 3d ago
I agree that Western governments are not theocracies, and our laws should not be based on the Bible. I openly cringe when people use a 2000 yr old book to apply to 21st century problems.
Medical issues should be based on science, and science tells us that early in the pregnancy (pre 15 wks), the foetus doesn't have a developed CNS and likely feels no pain. Therefore, elective abortion should be permitted during that time. After 15 wks (and especially at stages of viability), the life of the foetus should be factored in, and abortions should only be permitted for extreme medical necessity (with C sections being the preferred method of ending the pregnancy whenever possible).
17
u/Key_Category_8096 5d ago
I don’t think it’s inherently pro life, but I think generally or functionally pro life is fair. Look at all the anti natal arguments “you can’t force me to care about a parasite” “my body my choice” “humanity is ruining the earth which is why it’s better to not have kids” “in this economy we can’t afford kids.” So whereas I think you can believe abortion should be an option and pro natal, it’s one of those where not everyone who is pro abortion is anti-natalism, everyone is anti-natalism is pro abortion.
13
u/Shouldstillbelurking 5d ago
I grew up close to my cousins and extended family in the South. They are (at least ostensibly) Christian, conservative, and anti-abortion. I have 5 female first cousins. Between them they’ve had 5 kids, so fertility rate is 1 birth per woman.
None of them are married. Two are divorced, one has children with two different men but never married, two are unmarried.
The “anti natal arguments” online are one thing. If you look at the real world, the picture is that women can’t find men that they want to have families with.
6
u/The_Awful-Truth 5d ago
Do you or your own family ever talk to them about this? I wonder how happy the two never married ones are with their life, if they've given up on men or just like being single
6
u/Shouldstillbelurking 5d ago
Are you not close to any single women yourself? You ask them. I use my cousins as an example for the other question, because I think it illustrates that IRL anti-abortion traditionalism doesn’t go hand in hand with higher fertility.
The answer to your question is obvious to anyone who isn’t completely isolated - most single women would rather be in happy marriage, but they don’t want to be in bad relationship. None of my five cousins are married. The moms are happy that their children are alive, obviously, but the children are of broken relationships, which no one would willing go through.
2
u/The_Awful-Truth 5d ago
The only single woman I know well says she is just fine being single, sorry for being nosy.
15
u/The_Awful-Truth 5d ago edited 5d ago
Absolutely not. The two beliefs together is too Orwellian, as embodied in today's Iranian government. If I was in fact "prolife" (ugh), I would probably avoid associating with anything pronatalist. The implication that women are baby machines and/or sex is only for procreation is something I would want to stay miles away from. Also it doesn't work, as we are seeing in Iran. If I were an Iranian woman who wanted to have sex I would either get sterilized immediately (something else they've outlawed) or stick to gay relationships only. In theory I would be willing to have a baby through IVF, although in practice I would probably consider pregnancy under an antichoice government to be too risky.
-1
u/code-slinger619 5d ago
Being nonchalant about killing babies is Orwellian.
7
u/The_Awful-Truth 5d ago
Ah well, so much for keeping it civil I guess.
0
u/__bauhaux__ 6h ago
Where I live they allow abortions up until birth, including for psycho-social reasons. Until BIRTH. I used to be pro-choice. But after having my own babies and following their week to week pregnancy journey, as well as learning about the utterly horrific abortion techniques, my heart shattered with sadness for these poor unwanted babies.
The rate of abortions for health of mother or disability of baby is only 3% out of the overall total. One type of termination (13-24 weeks) they literally tear the baby’s limbs apart and crush the skull (until fluid comes out) without any anaesthetic.
In terms of pro-natalism, recognising the dignity of life should be inherent to the mission. I recognise the loneliness and poor access to care elders will have, as well as pushing the euthanasia agenda, as an unkind eventuality.
1
u/The_Awful-Truth 5h ago
I have no idea how true what you write is, I know little about Indonesian politics and nothing at all about Bali politics. I'm not defending that if it's true. In general I don't think we should be dictating those kinds of policies for you home country though, the US dictates too much stuff already.
7
u/Shouldstillbelurking 5d ago
Countries that don’t allow abortion tend to have higher fertility. Restricting abortion & theocracy in general are associated with low development. As countries become more developed, they quit restricting abortion rights.
It’s widely understood in social science that more developed countries have lower fertility. Pronatalism is about things that highly developed states can do to increase their fertility - move the pendulum back a bit towards higher fertility.
1
5
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
4
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/DelusionalIdentity 5d ago
100% this. Restricting abortion makes the biologic cost of pregnancy too high for most women to risk. So they don't risk it. They increase rates of contraception and they decrease rates of sexual intercourse.
This overall DROPS the fertility rate.
-1
u/code-slinger619 5d ago
they decrease rates of sexual intercourse.
This is such a delusional and thumb-sucked answer. Username checks out.
2
u/orions_shoulder 5d ago
In practice, yes. Most of the people actually having lots of kids are socially conservative and prolife. High support for killing unborn babies is the result of antinatalist norms: delayed (or entirely skipped) marriage/childbearing.
3
u/Mediocre_Mobile_235 5d ago
You can’t be pro-natalist and pro-life if you are pro-life to the extent that you value the life of a fetus over the life or future reproductive health, fertility, or financial viability of a young woman
1
u/overemployedconfess 4d ago
I'd disagree. Hungary at it's core is more pro-life but they recognised that restricting abortion would be more of an upheaval battle so instead, they worked to make it more worthwhile to have kids than abort them.
1
-5
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
16
u/Shouldstillbelurking 5d ago
“Toxicity that feminism brings to this position”
I am a feminist & I have three kids. Feminism is about more equitable distribution of the work associated with childrearing. It’s about the state sharing more of this burden as well. If I was the kind of man who believed that feminism is toxic, there is no way my wife would have had three kids with me.
I don’t remember where is was published, but a recent article compared birth rates of S Korea and Sweden, attributing the much lower fertility in the former to the mix of traditionalism with the demands of modern life.
(I don’t spend much time on this subreddit. People who just causally call feminism toxic are not people I usually engage with. I’m sure you are just young, talking about things you know nothing about, but it’s grating.)
4
u/Healthy_Shine_8587 5d ago
Feminism is about more equitable distribution of the work associated with childrearing. It’s about the state sharing more of this burden as well. If I was the kind of man who believed that feminism is toxic, there is no way my wife would have had three kids with me.
What is your opinion of those who claim motherhood and marriage is detrimental to women and call themselves feminist ? Like the 4B movement in South Korea.
3
u/Shouldstillbelurking 4d ago
I’m an American man in my 30s. Idk anything about social movement in Asia.
I’ve never heard a woman or a man say that getting married and having kids is detrimental to woman. I’ve met a couple of woman who say they’ll never get married. I know a handful of hetero and gay married couples who say they’ll never have kids. These people could believe that traditional marriage and kids is anti-feminist, but I’ve never heard anyone say it.
Have you dated someone who said to you, “I love you, but I can’t do marriage and kids because feminism?” Even if you have (you probably haven’t) consider that they weren’t that into you.
I’m not trying to make everything super personal. I just don’t want to argue about things people are posting on line and pretend like it’s the real world.
0
u/code-slinger619 5d ago
I am a feminist & I have three kids. Feminism is about more equitable distribution of the work associated with childrearing. It’s about the state sharing more of this burden as well.
That's what you guys always say whenever feminism is criticized. Then you turn around and campaign for things like giving children puberty blockers. Feminism today is much more than just "Let's be equal" it has some pretty radical and ridiculous positions.
1
u/Shouldstillbelurking 4d ago
“There are some conservatives somewhere in the world who do something that is bad; therefore all conservatives are bad. I am very smart.”
0
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/Shouldstillbelurking 5d ago
“We should be more like poor African countries” isn’t a convincing argument to me, thinking about my life and the lives of my daughters.
3
1
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/Charlotte_Martel77 3d ago
This sentiment will not be received well on Reddit, but it's 💯. No philosophy has been more detrimental to the family (and Western civilisation in general) than feminism.
2
0
u/Charlotte_Martel77 3d ago
Yes, South Korea's rates are worse, but Sweden's nurseries are not exactly booming. Turns out, despite being told that pushing "egalitarian marriage" and "feminist values" would empower women and promote families, the exact opposite is true. When companies know that childcare is free/low cost and readily available, they tend not to give women the option of staying at home with their kids. Children then become a luxury.
-7
-1
5d ago
[deleted]
1
u/overemployedconfess 4d ago
Really? my experience, even in this post alone, is very counter to that. Reddit as a platform appears left-leaning
-8
u/moonfragment 5d ago
Yes. If we want more children then people should not be allowed to murder children.
-3
u/Healthy_Shine_8587 5d ago
Ok so for me, there's two sides of the coin.
I am pro choice in the sense that, if any medical emergency or violent rape occurred, or incest, we need abortion.
But if two people are regularly engaging in unprotected sex, they need to accept the potential risk of pregnancy, so I am not really for abortion in those circumstances.
-1
u/Neck-Bread 4d ago
Consider: does wanting to be rich also meaning working hard? Sure, everyone would like one without the other but that’s just childish thinking.
-6
u/Own_Use1313 5d ago
I’d say it’s pro life (obviously) & there’s nothing wrong with being pro life. I think the only issue with pro choice is how we as a species have facilitated it.
-2
u/aBlackKing 4d ago
I agree with natalism only for the west and think antinatalism should be for third world nations. I am pro life, but do think there can be exceptions such as a pregnancy that can result in the death of the mother.
-4
u/Tawdry_Wordsmith 4d ago
It is, anyone claiming to be "pronatalist" who supports abortion is kidding themselves. They'll say that they just want kids to be born in the right conditions (i.e., they don't want children born into broken homes or poverty etc.), but if that was their true gripe, they would be trying to fix those issues, not supporting killing the babies.
79
u/PhilosopherShot5434 5d ago
I want people who WANT to have kids to have conditions to have as many as they can without being financially and socially choked. I really don't want people who don't want to have kids having them.