There is little doubt in my mind that the pro-choicer today doesn’t have much of an argument that he can hang his hat on. When flailing and pontificating about abortion as a “choice”, his only real avenue is to resort to a discussion of rights. He cannot say that the unborn are not human – it is a medical fact that they are – and therefore that abortion doesn’t kill human beings. No – the pro-choicer must resort to other arguments; in fact, in advocating abortion he attempts to rationalize for the legal killing of an innocent human being by advocating for women’s rights. Hence, while his argument may concede that the unborn are indeed human beings he then declares that that ought to have no bearing on a pregnant woman’s rights to her bodily autonomy. But does the woman really have the right to kill her own offspring? Does the bodily autonomy argument hold up under close scrutiny? Well, if a recent discussion I had on the topic is anything to go by, I really do think the argument is left wanting. And if so, then surely the pro-choicer has no choice but to abandon his ill-fated position.

It Started at the End

I had been reading Ravi Zacharias’s book, The End of Reason: A Response to the New Atheists, which was written in response to the vitriol published by Sam Harris in his book, Letter to a Christian Nation. There was one particular discussion in Zacharias’s book that I took a liking to – not at all related to Harris’s book when taken out of its context, but one which served effectively well as a conversation starter on the topic of abortion and morality. Read the rest of this entry