I've come to notice that some arguments that are thrown around by "Pro-Lifers" are actually completely irrelevant, and therefore unnecessary arguments, of their stance.
Fetal Pain
The debate and even the concept of fetal pain is completely irrelevant to the Pro-Life stance. It doesn't matter if the fetus can or can not feel pain. If fetuses were anesthetized prior to an abortion, Lifers would still be upset because the abortion was happening in the first place. It doesn't matter if the fetus can feel pain or not; their main issue is with abortion, not fetal pain. Fetal pain is irrelevant. Even if we could prove that fetuses never ever feel pain, that wouldn't stop them from attempting to achieve their goal. They use fetal pain despite its irrelevance to their actual stance to ban abortion (their main goal) after a certain number of weeks. They make it appear relevant to their stance, when it isn't.
Late-Term Abortions
Again, this is also used as a way to gather sympathy for the fetus, just as the fetal pain argument does. But it is still irrelevant to the Pro-Life stance. If abortion were illegal after, say, 12 weeks, Lifers still wouldn't be satisfied. Nope. Their goal is to ban all abortions at all stages. The development of the fetus and the age of its gestation at the time of abortion is completely irrelevant to their stance.
It has eyes and fingers and toes and can suck its thumb
As mentioned in the previous bit, development of the fetus doesn't matter. That the fetus has arms or legs or a brain or any organ doesn't matter. If the fetus had no brain, they'd still want a woman to birth it than abort it. I don't know what kind of defect the fetus would have to have that Lifers would actually support abortion for. It'd have to be pretty damn serious with a -5 percent survival rate. I don't know.
The "Pro-Life" goal is to ban all abortions regardless of stage of development, regardless of capacity to feel pain, regardless of organ function or lack thereof, regardless of the woman's health, regardless of anything that the woman might have to do, regardless of what she thinks or feels, unless the woman's physical life is in immediate jeopardy and both fetus and woman cannot be saved. Period. Everything else, fetal pain, development, etc. is irrelevant to their stance.
Or at least that is what I've noticed.
Just ranting. What have you noticed?