Answering Pro-Choice Arguments: Part 2
The pro-choice crowd plays a common card when talking with a pro-life male in particular. How many times have you heard someone say, “Until men grow a uterus, men can’t say anything about abortion.” Or something similar to that. Often, I find that this card is played when the pro-choicer is presented with an argument from the other side that they cannot rebut. And so, this is used as a last resort to end the conversation; or even, in some cases, to avoid the conversation taking place to begin with. But that is a cop-out. I like to keep the conversation going, as they may see that the pro-life position is based on facts and human rights using sound logic. That, of course, is the end-goal.
So how do you continue after hearing this claim? There are many things you can say, but in a conversation about the life of the unborn, you will likely be able only to say one. What you say will depend on who you are talking to, what direction the dialogue is going, and most importantly, what you think will get through to them the best.
The first response to this statement is this:
“My gender has nothing to do with the morality of killing a baby. Either my arguments are valid, or they are invalid.”
Your gender has nothing to do with the case you give them for your pro-life position. With this response, you are simultaneously exposing their statement as a red herring (a distraction from the main point of the argument), and taking the driver’s seat of the debate by steering the conversation back to the focal point.
The next response indulges their distraction, but this can be useful, as I will explain: “What do you mean by that? Why is my gender relevant?”
On the surface, this may seem similar to our first response, but these questions force the pro-choice advocate to either make a case for men not having a valid opinion on the subject, or conceding that men can contribute to the subject of abortion, so long as their case is logically sound. Let your opponent do the heavy lifting for you. They made the claim that men can’t speak on abortion, so they shoulder the burden of proof.
The last response is more rhetorically useful and can be very effective when having an open, public debate with a pro-choice advocate:
“Let’s assume for a moment that you are absolutely right, and that what men say on the subject of abortion doesn’t matter. Are you prepared to be consistent with that belief? If so, Roe Vs.Wade should be disregarded, as it was ruled on by nine male Supreme Court justices.”
Demanding consistency can be very powerful in certain situations. It diminishes the credibility of your opponent by showing how inconsistent they are in certain cases. Remember, public debates are not for persuading your opponent; that almost never happens. Rather, public debates are for the audience. It is they that you are trying to reach.
I hope these articles have given you some things to consider when you are talking with your pro-choice friends or family, and have inspired you to dig deeper on the subject in hope that you can become a more effective defender of the lives of the unborn.
Recommended Resources:
Video: Pro-Life Training: The Case Against Abortion and For Human Rights
Book: Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions