Old Stuff -- Instinct

A while back, I had a heated discussion on Facebook with a girl who I know to be vehemently — almost violently — “pro-life”.
Besides my general problems with the “pro-life” movement, this girl had the audacity to start saying that abortion “goes against the maternal instinct”.
I have two problems with this.

1. This girl finds certain other instincts — the instinct to fuck, for example — to be absolutely detestable.  If something is base by virtue of being instinctual, and, as a result, something for animals below our stature, then all instincts are thus painted with that brush, not just the ones you find to be “morally reprehensible.”
2. The biological imperative generally called “maternal instinct” is more than just “must protect my baby’s life at all costs.”  The actual maternal instinct is to do as much as possible to produce offspring that will be successful, and able to reproduce, spreading the genes; if you give birth to a child and do not have the means to care for it, you are actually going *against* the maternal instinct if you keep that up, since that child will end up a malnourished, prickly creature with a lack of a modern education.  This does not seem to breed success.

Now, I have some problems with the pro-life movement in general.  Perhaps not so much with their end goals — I’m all for reducing abortions, too, and I’m pretty damn pro-choice — but with their means of doing so.

1. I find the name “pro-life” to be an extreme misnomer.  Many of these people are, at best, pro-existence; many children born to those considering an abortion will end up doing little more than existing, and forcing this sorry state is a true shame.  Others will rally in favor of the death penalty within minutes of chanting and praying and singing and harassing in the name of the “right to life” that is held by all people.  However, a wise PR man once said that it is better to be “pro-x” than “anti-y”.  And, come now, how can one really be against life?
2. Many times, I will hear “we need to ban abortion” in the same breath as “we need to teach kids about abstinence!”  That’s great, but here’s the problem: abstinence-only education, based on many studies, ranges from utterly ineffective to actually being counterproductive, assuming the goal is to prevent sexual activity and pregnancy.  So, you want to prevent something “immoral” by preventing another “immoral” thing, but preventing the second “immoral” thing actually doesn’t work, and actually makes the first “immoral” thing more frequent.
3. I have yet to meet someone who is seriously pro-life that isn’t so based on some cockamamie BS their pastor pulled out of some misinterpretation of the Bible based on a translation of a translation of a translation of the words “given” to prophetic writers by “God”.

Yes, this bothers me.  A lot.