Refuting Pro-Choice Tropes


John Stonestreet

Last week, an Oklahoma state representative who describes himself as a “pragmatic progressive” announced on Twitter, “This week I filed HB3129, which codifies that a father’s financial responsibility to his baby and their mom begins at conception. If Oklahoma is going to restrict a woman’s right to choose, we sure better make sure the man involved can’t just walk away from his responsibility.” 

What he intended as a gotcha instead went viral with pro-lifers. They loved the proposal, and filled his feed with memes saying “your terms are acceptable.” The only resistance to the law came from pro-abortion allies. Quickly and furiously, the lawmaker backpedaled with a follow-up tweet: 

“I understand how the language in my message and bill both hurt the cause instead of helping it, and I apologize for not being more thoughtful….”  

It’s just amazing that so many still claim and so many still buy the whole “pro-lifers only care about babies before birth” nonsense, but they do. Which means, we must continue to refute this silly narrative, in both word and deed.  


  • Facebook Icon in Gold
  • Twitter Icon in Gold
  • LinkedIn Icon in Gold

Have a Follow-up Question?

Related Content