I often use the snippet below when addressing pro-life reasoning online or in person. One can obviously go in-depth on any number of pro-life topics and responses to pro-abortion arguments, but I like to have something short yet comprehensive handy. Feel free to use without attribution if you would find it helpful in any way. Hat tip to Stand to Reason for the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs.
Pro-life reasoning is simple and accurate: It is a scientific fact (http://tinyurl.com/yfje8lq ) and basic common sense (what else would two human beings produce?) that a new human being is reproduced at fertilization. Seriously, go check out any mainstream embryology textbook. I’m too pro-science to be pro-choice. Based on the settled science, it is then simple moral reasoning that it is wrong to take the life of an innocent human being without proper justification, and that is what happens during 99% of abortions.
The situations surrounding abortions are psychologically complex (pressures on the mother to abort, economic concerns, etc.) but morally simple (you don’t kill unwanted humans outside the womb for those reasons, so you shouldn’t kill them inside the womb for those reasons). Their size, level of development, location and degree of dependency are not reasons to ignore their right to life. Arguments about “bodily autonomy” ignore the body destroyed in the abortion.
In other words, it is wrong to take the life of an innocent human being without proper justification. Abortion does that. Therefore, abortion is wrong.
7 thoughts on “Basic pro-life reasoning”
I’m not so sure. Have you heard of the Zika virus? Quite a few women are opting to abort in order to prevent microcephaly. I just saw a baby born anencephaly die at eleven hours old. If it would have died either way, then how could abortion be wrong if it God wasn’t going to let it live to be a day old anyway?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Jamie — thanks for visiting and commenting. I’ve heard a little about the Zika virus.
We are ALL going to die “either way.” But we shouldn’t be the judge of whether you get to zero hours outside the womb (i.e., abortion) or 11 hours, or 11 years, or 111 years. You have put yourself in the position of God by arbitrarily saying how long someone must be able to live before you can just kill them.
Oh, and killing people because they MIGHT have a disease seems like a bad idea as well.
When God went Old Testament on people, he didn’t spare anyone. He prevented Abimelek’s household from conceiving because of Sarah – but we haven’t seen God do that in forever. He let Ichabod’s mother die during childbirth – which still happens far too frequently, but not as frequently as it used to thanks to a lot of clever medical intervention. He let Solomon’s brother die at a week old – of an apparently common disease that affected newborns. He also didn’t bother to stop Pharaoh or Herod from wiping out toddlers and infants. When He ordered genocides – Hhe ordered the deaths of infants and expectant mothers. I don’t know about playing God – he’s been pretty creative about the destruction of the unborn and newborns. Back in the day, the ancient Rabbis believed that infants who didn’t survive to be a month old were the equivalent of stillborn babies, who ought to be buried somewhere the parents would know where and ought to go unmourned because they weren’t really alive. After all, the dangers of childbirth meant that infants died all the time and their mothers often also died. But isn’t declaring that all people must live as long as life can be forced from their bodies just as much playing God?
“I don’t know about playing God – he’s been pretty creative about the destruction of the unborn and newborns.”
You obviously don’t know God and the fact that He is sovereign over life and death. It is morbidly ironic that you sit in judgment of him for taking lives – which is his prerogative – then use it as an excuse to take them yourself.
“Back in the day, the ancient Rabbis believed that infants who didn’t survive to be a month old were the equivalent of stillborn babies, who ought to be buried somewhere the parents would know where and ought to go unmourned because they weren’t really alive.”
So you not only dismiss God’s sovereignty but use it as an excuse to kill yourself, then appeal to an ancient non-biblical / anti-biblical tradition to justify killing children? That seems inconsistent to me.
“But isn’t declaring that all people must live as long as life can be forced from their bodies just as much playing God?”
No. You are using a deadly equivocation by pretending that not crushing and dismembering a child is equivalent to taking the role of God.
That brings up an interesting question about God’s sovereignty – how can we be sure that in his sovereignty that he didn’t invent abortion so that it would be used to take the lives of those that God really didn’t want to be born? If God didn’t want abortion – shouldn’t he have been sovereign enough to prevent it in the first place?
Here’s a better question: What if God invented murder to remove people who asked silly hypotheticals about God’s sovereignty?
Your rebellion against your creator shows through in every comment. Go back and read all of the Bible carefully and you’ll find out everything you need to know about God. He is perfectly just, so every sin ever committed will be rightfully addressed — either by Jesus on the cross or by non-believers in Hell, and also perfectly loving and merciful and delighting to forgive those who repent.
For his good reasons He let Adam and Eve sin, bringing destruction and death into the world. But from the beginning He had a beautiful rescue plan. I encourage you to avail yourself of it while you still can.
If you authentically seek God on his terms, you will find him. If you think you get to sit in judgment of the real God, you will not find him. If you “seek” a god of your own making, you will not find him – except in the mirror, and as you know that god has rather limited powers.
That may sound obvious, but think about how so many people in our culture think that all religions lead to God. Lots of false teachers in churches will tell you such things. People claim that they wouldn’t believe in a God who says that homosexual behavior is a sin or who sends guilty sinners to Hell.
They don’t recognize the absurdity of thinking something doesn’t exist just because they don’t like it or the idea that they can tell the real God what He must be like.
Consider if you went to a company for a job and demanded that they hire you on your terms. Hey, go ahead and ask for a million dollar salary and unlimited vacation. Ridiculous, eh? But only a tiny fraction as ridiculous as thinking you are going to tell God how things get done.
Or tell the cop who pulled you over that you set the speed limits today and that he is wasting your time.
Or tell your teacher that she has to give you an A+ even though you won’t come to class, do homework or take tests.
Better yet, go to McDonald’s and tell the cashier to give you your entire meal for $1 and see how that works.
People can’t even unilaterally dictate the terms and conditions to the person infinitesimally and momentarily higher than them on the cosmic food chain but they think that the one true God reports to them under the divine organization chart.
The rich young ruler walked away sadly when he didn’t like Jesus’ terms and conditions and Jesus didn’t chase after him to negotiate.
I recommend seeking God on his terms. They are unbelievably wonderful and gracious.
Jesus really lived, died and rose again. He is the only way to salvation. https://1eternitymatters.wordpress.com/2010/04/02/evidence-for-the-resurrection-2/
Summary of the “minimal facts” approach: Nearly 100% of historical scholars from 1975 – present agree with the following statements:
1. Jesus really lived and was killed on a Roman cross.
2. Jesus’ disciples believed He appeared to them.
3. Jesus’ brother, James, went from being a pre-crucifixion skeptic to a post-crucifixion church leader.
4. The Apostle Paul believed Jesus appeared to him and he wrote most of the books attributed to him, including Romans, I & II Corinthians, Philemon and others. He converted from persecuting Christians to being the greatest evangelist ever, despite nearly constant challenges, persecution and ultimately dying for his faith.
Also, 75% of the same scholars agree that the tomb was empty.
None of the alternative theories can be true in light of these facts. The physical resurrection of Jesus best accounts for these facts.
Hm. Interesting question. If it was, then I could finally get some straight answers about pretty much everything. Then I’d let you know what he said if he decided it wasn’t my time to go after all. Though that is a tad extreme.