re: Planned Parenthood keeps saying 3% of their income is from abortions

The hypothetical is being criticized because of the inference made based on the choice. The entire point of the hypothetical is to prove the alleged hypocrisy of those who claim to be pro-life by their choice of a singular, born child over multiple fertilized embryos. The assumption is that a person who picks the born child doesn't believe that the embryos have value, or at least not as much as the child they choose to save, therefore they either don't really believe the mantra they proclaim about saving the unborn or that they don't take their belief in their value seriously.

There are multiple problems with this situation, the first being that it's intended to illicit an emotional response which is supposed to outweigh the rational knowledge of value of the embryos. In reality, there isn't a "right" answer because the hypothetical is meant to show how backwards or cruel the pro-lifer is regardless of the choice. Choose the born child and you are a hypocrite. Choose the embryos and you are a monster. What this leads to is an opinion being drawn about the person making the choice but it doesn't say anything about the actual value of both the embryos and the born child.

Secondly, the situation does not account for the natural tendency of the chooser to make the least harmful decision based on many factors like pain and suffering (the born child would have a lot where the embryos wouldn't have any); the suffering of the ones related to the born child vs. the embryos which have not yet been loved or cared for; or that the born child would likely live if saved while the embryos may not all be used or survive even if saved from the burning house. Again, the choice to do the least amount of harm is the natural tendency, and it's natural for a person to choose the born child in such a situation without violating the rational understanding of life of the embryos. The same situation could be altered to use family vs. strangers, friends vs. enemies, or some other variation meant to disprove the notion that all lives have value. A crisis hypothetical only reveals an individuals emotional biases, not their rational understanding.

Lastly, the hypothetical seeks to put saving embryos that are going to die in a fire without intervention on the same footing as killing embryos in a womb that would otherwise live. It tries to prove a point by showing how a person would react in a crisis situation where one life dies and another lives and ignores a situation where both lives could live without a choice to change it. It's the difference between doing harm and offering aid.