Article adapted from episode content.

I want to talk to you today about how to be a smarter defender of abortion. Now, you might find that phrasing strange, and I understand why. I am a pro-life advocate, and I believe abortion is morally wrong. But I also believe in having honest, intelligent discussions about difficult topics, and that includes abortion.

What I’ve seen lately from abortion advocates is deeply concerning. Instead of engaging in thoughtful debate, many resort to personal attacks and emotional appeals. They accuse pro-lifers of hating women, wanting to control women, and not caring about children once they’re born. While these attacks might feel good to hurl, they do nothing to advance the conversation. In fact, they actively hinder it.

Let’s be clear: the abortion debate is not about who loves women more or who is more compassionate. The abortion debate is about one fundamental question: do the unborn count as members of the human family? Do they have the same right to life as those who have been born? This is the question that must be addressed if we are to have an honest and productive conversation.

I recently spent some time reviewing online comments responding to pro-life arguments, and I was deeply disappointed by what I found. Almost all of the comments were personal attacks, with zero attempts to engage with the actual arguments being made. One commenter even resorted to threats of violence. This is simply unacceptable.

If you support abortion, I urge you to do better. Engage with the arguments, not the people making them. You need to understand the pro-life position and be able to articulate why you disagree with it. Don’t just shout slogans or resort to name-calling. That’s not intellectual honesty, and it won’t persuade anyone.

Here’s the thing: bad people can make good arguments, and good people can make bad arguments. It doesn’t matter if you think pro-lifers are the worst people in the universe. That doesn’t change the validity of their arguments. If you want to refute the pro-life position, you need to address their claims directly. You need to show that their premises are false or that their conclusions don’t follow logically from their premises.

Attacking the person making the argument, known as an ad hominem attack, is a logical fallacy and does nothing to refute the argument itself. Imagine Joseph Stalin, a man responsible for countless deaths, arguing that Socrates is mortal because all men are mortal. While we might despise Stalin for his actions, his argument about Socrates remains logically sound. The same principle applies to the abortion debate.

So, how can abortion advocates become more effective in their arguments? Here’s my advice:

• Read the work of pro-life scholars and thinkers. Don’t just rely on pro-choice sources. Understand the strongest arguments from the opposing side. I recommend books like The Case for Life by Scott Klusendorf, which directly addresses the arguments of prominent pro-choice thinkers.
• Avoid making bad arguments. For example, don’t bring up Margaret Sanger’s racist views as a reason to support abortion. Sanger’s views, while reprehensible, have no bearing on the moral permissibility of abortion. Likewise, avoid the argument that abortion has deprived us of potential geniuses. The pro-life position is not based on the potential of the unborn, but on their inherent right to life.
• Focus on the real issue: personhood. This is the crux of the abortion debate. What makes someone a person? When does personhood begin? These are the questions you need to grapple with.
• Consider the implications of your arguments. If you believe that personhood begins at birth, why? What makes birth so significant? Can you defend that position against the arguments of those who believe personhood begins at conception or at some point during pregnancy? If you believe that viability is the determining factor, can you explain why the ability to survive outside the womb suddenly confers personhood?
• Be willing to have difficult conversations. Engaging with people who hold opposing views can be challenging, but it’s essential for intellectual growth and for finding common ground.

To help you engage more thoughtfully with the pro-life position, I recommend reading the following books by pro-choice authors:

• Abortion Practice by Dr. Warren Hern: This book provides a detailed account of abortion procedures, written by a doctor who performs them. While graphic, it’s essential to understand what abortion entails.
• Practical Ethics by Peter Singer: Singer argues that the arbitrary lines drawn between fetus and newborn don’t hold up and that newborns, like fetuses, don’t have a right to life. He even suggests that infanticide can be morally justified.
• The Ethics of Killing by Dr. Jeff McMahan: McMahan argues that personhood is based on mental continuity and that neither fetuses nor newborns possess this quality. He acknowledges that his view challenges the concept of human equality.
• A Defense of Abortion by David Boonin: Boonin argues that while we once existed as embryos, we didn’t have the same right to life then as we do now because we lacked immediately exercisable desires.
• Arguments about Abortion by Kate Greasley: Greasley proposes a “range view” of personhood, suggesting that personhood emerges gradually but that all individuals within the “range” of personhood, which begins at birth, are equally valuable. She also critiques Judith Jarvis Thomson’s famous violinist argument for bodily autonomy.
• Abortion, Law, Choice, and Morality by Dr. Daniel Callahan: Callahan summarizes various arguments for and against abortion and emphasizes the importance of the personhood question.

By engaging with the work of these thinkers, you’ll gain a deeper understanding of the pro-choice position and be better equipped to defend it. Remember, the goal is not to “win” the debate, but to have a productive conversation that leads to greater understanding and perhaps even common ground.

Ultimately, I believe we can do better than slinging insults and making bad arguments. We owe it to ourselves, and to the unborn, to engage in this debate with intellectual honesty and respect. Only then can we hope to find a resolution that upholds the dignity of all human life.