Monday, March 27, 2017

Pt. 1- Four Dishonest Ways to Argue about Abortion

Here at Truthbomb Apologetics we are unapologetically pro-life.  It is our desire to not only defend life, but to equip others to do so as well.  We regularly feature posts by pro-life ministries such as Life Training Institute, Human Coalition and Stand to Reason for that purpose.1

This week we begin a four week series called, "Four Dishonest Ways to Argue about Abortion."  This series will feature four common arguments proponents of abortion often make and why they fail.  The responses come from Stand to Reason's excellent resource, "Pro-Life Defense Quick-Reference Guide."

1. Confuse Moral Claims with Preference Claims.

The pro-life opposition to abortion is an objective moral claim.  It is not a claim of preference.  To illustrate this better, look at two common responses to the pro-life claim that abortion is morally wrong.

"That's just your view."

This objection treats our claim as a mere statement of preference.  However, we are not saying that we personally dislike abortion or that we would prefer that women didn't have abortions.  We are saying that elective abortion is objectively wrong for everyone regardless of how they feel about it.

Yes, it is our view, but not just our view.  We're saying that abortion is wrong in itself, whether people prefer it or not.

"Don't force your morality on others."

This is a common example of the pervasive idea that no objective standard of right and wrong exists, also known as moral relativism.  But there are fundamental problems with this view.

The very statement itself is self-refuting.

In other words, "You have no right to tell someone that their actions are wrong."  But what are you saying when you say, "Don't force your morality.."?  You are saying that the pro-lifers actions are wrong, the very thing you just said they had no right to do.

To be consistent, it would be impossible to say that anything is wrong.

If morals are relative, it would e impossible to say that anything is wrong.  If morals are relative, then who are you to say that anyone should be tolerant?  If no objective standard of right or wrong exists, then there is no principled opposition to Adolf Hitler's morality.  He simply had preferences different from our own.  This is obviously wrong.2

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Footnotes:
1. For those interested in learning how to argue for the pro-life position both scientifically and philosophical, see my article "Live Action, Snopes and Planned Parenthood" here.
2. See here.

Related Posts

Brian Fisher on the Federal Government and Abortion

When Pro-Abortion Choice Rhetoric Hurts

Could Acceptance of Abortion Be a Matter of Ignorance?

No comments: