Staying Fetus-Focused

Continuing the series of posts on the subject of abortion, I would like to discuss a strategy which you might consider adopting when talking about abortion with those who are pro-choice.

Types of Objection

I would suggest that, when we’re talking about abortion, the discussion really needs to focus on the unborn themselves. What actually are they? In the process of having an abortion, what exactly is being killed?

You see, when pro-choice advocates object to the pro-life position, their objections fall into one of two categories:

1. On-topic Objections
These objections are fetus-focussed. For example, if someone says “It’s just a clump of cells”, their objection is on-topic and allows us to discuss the central issue: the unborn child.

2. Off-topic Objections
These objections relate to some peripheral issue and don’t concern the unborn themselves. For example, these following arguments are sometimes given in favour of abortion:

(a) “The world is overpopulated”

(b) “Raising a child is extremely expensive”

(c) “Not all children will have a stable home life”

(d) …

All of these objections are off-topic.

With regards to the off-topic objections, pro-lifers and pro-choicers will, by and large, agree that the problem being raised does need to be addressed by society. For example, both groups want to see poverty eradicated, vulnerable women protected, children born into stable, nurturing homes. However, the difference is those who are pro-life don’t think that the problem raised is sufficient justification for the killing of a defenseless, innocent life.

From off-topic to on-topic

The problem is that when off-topic objections are raised, they can quickly derail the debate and take the discussion away from the central issue. So, when these objections are raised, we need a strategy to deal effectively with the side issue which has been brought up, and then guide the conversation back to the subject of the unborn themselves. I would suggest that following three steps will achieve this:

1. Agree (that the issue raised is a problem)
Communicate that you recognize that the issue raised would make bringing a child into the world more complicated and that it is a something which society does need to address.

2. Apply (the argument to a toddler)
Represent the objection once more, but this time replace the unborn child with a toddler.

3. Ask (a dumb question)
Hopefully the pro-choice advocate will dislike the fact that his argument has now been used as justification for infanticide, so ask him why he baulks at it. In responding to this question, your friend will most likely describe the difference he sees between the born and the unborn. In doing so, you have got the conversation back on-topic, as well as having addressed the side issue.

This might seem a little abstract, so next let’s look at a couple of examples.

Example #1: “Some people are too poor to raise a child”

Poverty is an argument often used in favour of abortion. Here’s how you might respond:

1. Agree (that the issue raised is a problem)
“I agree with you that lack of finances can make having a child stressful and that some women have few resources available to them…”

2. Apply (the argument to a toddler)
“… However, let’s apply that argument a little more generally. For example, should a woman kill a toddler if she couldn’t afford it? No, right?”

3. Ask (a dumb question)
“… In that case, please excuse the dumb question, but why do you think she should be allowed to kill her unborn child, but not the two-year old?”

In response to step 3, the person might say “Well, it’s because the unborn aren’t really human…”. Congratulations, we’re now back on-topic, talking about the unborn, rather than some peripheral issue.

Example #2: “There are too many people in the world”

Now, let’s do the same thing again with another off-topic objection concerning world population. Although the assertion itself could be disputed, you might simply concede it for sake of argument to bring the discussion back on-topic:

1. Agree (that the issue raised is a problem)
“I agree that managing the earth’s resources is important, so let’s just say for the sake of argument that the world is overpopulated…”

2. Apply (the argument to a toddler)
“… But if the world is over-populated, should we be able to kill some toddlers to bring the numbers down? No, right?”

3. Ask (a dumb question)
“… In that case, please excuse the dumb question, but why we can we kill the unborn in the womb and not kill toddlers?”

Again, in response to the final step the objector will most likely respond with an objection which is on-topic, such as “We don’t value the unborn as much as we value toddlers”. This hasn’t resolved the dispute but it has, at least, got the discussion back on topic.

More posts on abortion apologetics tomorrow!