By continuing to browse our site, you are consenting to the use of cookies. Click here for more information on the cookies we use.


Defending life
from conception to natural death


WATCH: Ann Furedi's debate with former Planned Parenthood worker shows the true face of the abortion industry

20 February 2019

​Sue Thayer (r), a former Planned Parenthood manager, debates Ann Furedi. 

She said she "struggles" with why infanticide is not the same as late term abortion 

Sue Thayer was the manager of a Planned Parenthood centre in Iowa for almost 18 years. After a remarkable conversion experience, she led the first ever 40 Days for Life campaign in her town -outside the centre she used to work for. 

As someone who knows the abortion industry from the inside, Sue Thayer is a powerful voice in the pro-life movement. Now the Director of Outreach at 40 Days for Life, she recently travelled to England - and debated Ann Furedi, the head of Britain's largest abortion provider.

Ann Furedi has always been an unapologetic advocate of the most extreme pro-abortion position - - a stance with is both strikingly blunt and disturbing. This debate, which was hosted by Premier Christian Radio, straightforwardly reveals what horrific things you have to support if you follow pro-choice arguments to their logical conclusion.


Life begins at conception…but you can still kill it

Many arguments about abortion still revolve around when life begins. However, Ann Furedi agreed with Sue Thayer that life begins at conception. "I, too, believe that from the time an egg is fertilized that a human life is there…and that unique life is wonderful and is marvellous," she said. However, "the point is…it’s really about who makes the decision about how that life is valued…in relation to other things." For her, the will of the mother trumps any consideration of the baby - however developed it may be.

Throughout the debate, she advocated abortion being legally available at any stage of pregnancy. She admitted that abortion is often a knee-jerk reaction to an unexpected pregnancy, but said that the solution is to allow it as late as possible, to give the woman "time and space to weigh up her options". 

Late term abortion is horrible - but it should be legal

She said that it is "bizarre" that abortion is allowed at 24 weeks, and a criminal offence at 24 weeks and 1 day - seeming to concede that if you do not protect life from the point of conception, any other time limit is arbitrary. 

However, unlike many abortion advocates, she admitted how horrific late term abortion in particular is. “It is horrible. There is no doubt about it…You look at the remains following a late-term abortion, and it is grim. But it’s completely put into a different light by the conversations…about why the women…are going through that procedure."

"Struggles" with why infanticide isn't permissible

Ms Furedi took the horrific implications of permitting late-term abortion even further, saying she "struggled" with how it is different to killing a baby after birth. Stunningly. she agreed that "from the foetal perspective, nothing changes [during birth], it's just a matter of geography. The only reason infanticide is different, she said, is that a mother does not have to look after a baby post-birth (she said nothing of cases where this would not be a realistic option).

Women have abortions when they feel they don’t have a choice

Perhaps the most incredible admission Ms Furedi made during the debate was that abortion isn't really about choice. "No woman ever exercises the right to abortion [like] the right to vote," she said."[They] do it because they don’t think they have any other answer." This was rather undermined by her claim that no woman who goes to a BPAS clinic "has their pregnancy terminated unless that is what they want to happen."

What Ann Furedi said in this debate is horrific - but many of her points were the logical conclusion of the consistently pro-choice position. A society that doesn't protect life from conception is one that allows late-term abortion, coercion, and ultimately infanticide.

News in brief:

Add your comment

Comments (1)

  • Jeremy

    21 February 2019, 9:39pm

    Very well reported by SPUC. The 'logical' conclusion follows the good or evil basis upon which it is based. Ms Furedi - on her basis for logic - illustrates the terrifying suggestion that in her world, infanticide is okay. Such thinkers need deradicalization in the very same way as terrorists - and urgently.

    Your comment has been submitted and is currently awaiting approval

Share this article

  Donate to save lives