I’ve taught pro-life reasoning for over 10 years and debated countless people online, but had never dialogued directly with an abortionist until now. Professional child-killer Willie Parker is not just an abortionist, which would be bad enough, but he claims to be a Christian and that his work is for the Lord. As an introduction, this Newsweek interview with him has the usual pro-abort rationalizations.
- He thinks of himself as heroic by aborting the child of an incest victim, as if killing her child solved her problems. The abortion industry routinely protects sex traffickers, rapists and those who commit incest. Not only does killing the child not undo the crimes, these abortionists send the victims back to their abusers!
- He refers to “reproductive justice,” but that’s when you don’t kill the child who has already been reproduced.
- He says he won’t do abortions for those who express race or gender differences, yet he simultaneous claims that those he kills aren’t people yet.
- He claims to be a Christian yet says the Bible supports sexism – i.e., he admits to disagreeing with the Bible.
- He spouts gibberish like this, which of course would justify anything anyone would ever do: “If God is in everything, and everyone, then God is as much in the woman making a decision to terminate a pregnancy as in her Bible.”
- He says women will do unsafe abortions if he doesn’t do them, ignoring that many women do unsafe abortions even when legal, that making them legal increases abortion rates, and that one is never obligated to make it safer for someone to have her child killed.
- He gladly performs abortions like these: “women in poverty and women of color. He has seen patients from a recently divorced mother of three, with a 1-year-old at home, to a 21-year-old middle-distance runner trying to trim seconds off her 800-meter time to qualify for the Rio Olympics.”
- In the Newsweek article he denied that life began at conception, but he admitted it during the Twitter exchange.
So that’s a little about Willie. Someone reTweeted him so I commented and he actually responded. A few of the comments and my replies (multiple Tweets sometimes combined into one):
Dr. Willie Parker — As someone who provides abortions and who witnesses the relief and gratitude of women who obtain them safely, I could say, TOLD YOU SO!, but gloating is overrated. Abortion doesn’t cause depression, but pro-birth zealots sure do. [There was a link to an article alleging that many women don’t feel guilty about having abortions.]
Note how he calls us zealots, yet later whines about alleged name-calling on my part for my precision in calling him a child-killer. I choose my words carefully. Some call the unborn babies, and I know why. But it lets pro-aborts say that isn’t the correct term. They still try that when I say children, but then I point them to the dictionary. Same thing when they deny personhood.
eMatters — Whether your conscience is so thoroughly seared that you don’t regret killing your children is irrelevant. It will always be morally wrong.
My reply was actually about whether the mothers felt guilty, but he took it personally.
Dr. Willie Parker — My critics are many. Occasionally, I reply to make a point, like fetuses aren’t people, women are. My reply: If the world were as simple as you think it is, you’d be right. But since it isn’t & since I’ve never killed a child, you didn’t make a point, you stated the obvious.
eMatters — You are wildly ignorant of science. Check any embryology textbook: A new human being is created at fertilization. Must have been too busy learning to kill at school What else would two humans create?! http://www.abort73.com/abortion/medical_testimony/ And see http://dictionary.com . You kill CHILDREN. Oh, and the seared conscience comment applies to the MOTHERS as well. They should feel guilty for paying you to kill their children, but whether their consciences are seared is irrelevant. I meet lots of unrepentant murderers doing prison ministry. They were still wrong.
Dr. Willie Parker –Insults don’t make your point. Fetuses are human beings, because women don’t give birth to puppies, but to be a human being is not the same as being a person. In my “scientific ignorance” I know the difference between a frog & a tadpole, and an acorn & an oak tree. Do you?
eMatters –Yes, you are ignorant of science. And vocabulary. Once again, the nice folks at http://dictionary.com can help you out: Person: a human being, whether an adult or child: a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing. So your anti-science word games fail you again. You kill human children for a living. That’s sick. Surely you know the logical fallacies with your acorn / oak tree illustration, right? https://apologiabyhendrikvanderbreggen.blogspot.com/2008/10/acorns-and-oak-treesand-abortion.html
Dr. Willie Parker — Women die during childbirth, but we don’t outlaw childbirth. Check any person who delivers babies.
eMatters — Gracious of you, as a professional child killer, to put these fallacious sound bites out there for all to see. You’re the pro and that’s all you’ve got? Willie says women can die during childbirth, therefore it is OK to kill children to their 1st breath. Non sequitur much? Conflating death by natural causes vs. actively killing them? Such great pro-abort logic. Most people can see the difference: A. Human being dies of natural causes (inside or outside the womb) B. Human being is deliberately killed by a 3rd party (inside or outside the womb) The fetus in question is a human being at a particular stage of development: Human embryo ==> human fetus ==> human baby ==> human toddler ==> etc. Always human and always worthy of protection.
Dr. Willie Parker — Developmentally your argument is that human conceptions are persons throughout: fetuses are babies are toddlers are college graduates. Embryo and fetus are scientific terms, baby and toddler are not. How deftly you switch from science to culture, key for embracing pseudoscience.
eMatters — That’s completely false. Why do you feel the need to deceive like that? I couldn’t have been more clear. It is a human fetus. Human embryo ==> human fetus ==> human baby ==> human toddler ==> etc. Same human being at different stages of development.
Dr. Willie Parker — Given that your thinking is linear, your arguments circular and legalistic, and your reference materials are Webster’s dictionary and live action news, you get to have the last word, insults and all. I’ll keep honoring women’s decisions, and you can judge them and call me names.
eMatters — Yeah, referring to dictionary definitions and medical textbook citations for the specific words being debated is legalistic. 🙂 Pretty lame dodge, Willie. Live Action was just quoting PP. Your attack is an example of the genetic fallacy. If I call you a professional child killer, I am being very precise. You get paid, and by medical and standard dictionary definitions, you kill human children. Killing the children when mothers pay you is a peculiar way to honor them. And you never demonstrated any circular logic. I just pointed to scientific facts: Every fetus you have killed was a human being at a particular stage of development. You tried to weasel word you way out by calling them [non-] persons, then I showed how you were wrong. I hope you repent and believe someday – and soon, before you kill too many more children. We are all sinners in need of a Savior. If you don’t, you’ll have eternity to be punished for your countless crimes against God.
And it was just as creepy seeing all his fans calling him a hero and such for being so caring.
P.S. And of course, I got the usual pro-aborts chiming in with fallacies about how we don’t help the poor after they are born. I usually post this when I get those comments.