I’m trying to determine the lowest number of categories one could reasonably identify most pro-life efforts/groups. The determining factor is by function – the primary function performed by the group.

Here’s the list of categories:

1. Actions: events/activities. March for Life, 40 Days for Life, Right to Life, Priests for Life.
2. Journalism: investigative journalism/reporting. LiveAction.
3. Newsfeeds/distribution: News monitoring, consolidation. LifeSite, LifeNews.
4. Education/Training: Bio-ethics, lifestyle, media. STR, LTI, FamilyLife, FoF, churches.
5. Direct Support: outreach/healing support ministries. HBI, CareNet, Rachel’s Vineyard, StandupGirl.
6. Testimony: public human interest/evidence impact. Operation OutCry, Silent No More.
7. Arts: expressive/artistic media efforts. Bella, Volition, etc.

Some organizations overlap and provide multiple services. Some are difficult to identify as clearly belonging in one group or the other.

Are there any categories that are missing?  Are there any groups that would break this categorization?  Thoughts, comments?  (Thanks!)

Human Rights pro-life, strategy

This is the best rational argument against abortion I’ve found to date. Every counter-argument comes right back to these same human rights issues, and is thus refutable.

Everyone concedes abortion kills something. The crucial question is “what is killed?”

If the unborn are not human, no justification for elective abortion is necessary. But if the unborn are human, no justification for elective abortion is adequate. (Koukl, Precious Unborn Human Persons, p. 7)

Morally, it’s wrong to kill innocent human beings.

We base that morality on three factors:

1. Intrinsic value of human beings – an intangible quality.
2. Common nature of human flesh and blood – biological evidence of Law of Biogenesis, uniqueness of DNA & embryological/anatomical science.
3. The equality of common physical attributes of human beings - Size, Level of Development, Environment, and Degree of Dependency (SLED). 

If we do not morally discriminate against human beings outside the womb with these attributes (we treat them equally as humans under the law) then such conclusions also apply to pre-born human beings because:

• Size - Hillary Clinton is not less human than Shaquille O’Neal. An embryo is not less human than a newborn.
• Level of Development – Toddlers are less developed than pre-adolescents who are less developed than adults. An embryo is the organ development stage of a human being while in the next stage, a fetus’s organs mature, just as an adolescent’s organs mature through puberty.  
• Environment – Astronauts and scuba divers do not lose their human nature in non-supportive environments.  A womb is the natural environment for the pre-born at their level of development. Exposing human beings to unnatural, uninhabitable environments is an act of murder.
• Dependency – We don’t kill those who depend upon us. Infants depend upon parents/guardians for all their primary needs. Our dependencies extend to each other, and without the defense of the goodness of meeting human dependencies, none of us would be alive.

Discussing pro-life views shouldn’t be a monologue. Provide your reasoning, but also ask others questions to bring them into conversation. Seek points you agree on; ask why they are important. Establish common ground before refuting objections. Your response will then be appropriate.

Here’s how to refute two very common objections to BioSLED: 1) Non-Personhood and 2) Mother’s Rights.

1. Refuting Non-Personhood Arguments – such arguments deny the intrinsic quality of human beings by falsely assuming (petitio principii) two components (body and person), instead of one. These are a play on Level of Development. Gently ask: “Would you be willing to undergo the same destruction of your body that is performed on the unborn during an abortion, and if not – why?” They can’t prove their own personhood without referring to their own physical body, so gently question them until they do. We know scientifically from the moment of conception the pre-born also has a human body. We can’t establish tests for denying the rights of pre-born human beings that we, who also have human flesh and blood, are unwilling to take – that’s discrimination. Refuting this works best in-person, not over the Internet.
2. Refuting Bodily Autonomy Arguments (aka Mother’s Rights) – some argue gestation is a special right granted by the mother. This goes back to Dependency. We don’t kill those who are dependent upon us. Some argue biological dependency is different, but this falsely assumes (petitio principii) the responsibility to be humane can have exceptions because an innocent human being is undeniably killed. Further, such killing is an act of commission, meaning the violence of abortion is a direct appeal to force (argumentum ad baculum) on the mother’s behalf. Specifically, force is appealed to based on the victim’s Environment – the natural location in the womb of the child’s mother. We wouldn’t want anyone we were dependent upon to justify killing us because we existed in an environment they claimed.

Although BioSLED is an exceptionally strong argument against abortion, it needs to be conveyed gracefully, and the best way to do that is in person in a non-threatening way. Those who defend abortion usually do so for very personal reasons. So no matter how logical, the heart has to change.

This argument is like a very sharp Japanese Samurai sword – it is not meant to be handled without great discipline, respect or care for the other person. Use it only in love.

If you find this valuable – please link to it. If you think it needs improvement – let me know in the comments. Thanks!

This argument is based on the work of Scott Klusendorf of Life Training Institute, Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason, Francis Beckwith’s Defending Life and the SLED acronym came from Stephen Schwarz who wrote The Moral Question of Abortion.

Human Rights abortion, bioSLED, Debate, pro-life

Steve Wagner provides a nice quick, one minute pro-life argument:

If the unborn is growing, it must be alive. And if it has human parents, it must be human. And living humans, or human beings like you and I, are valuable aren’t they? From conception, all that’s added to the unborn is a proper environment and adequate nutrition. But those are the same things all of us need. And not only that. There’s one quality all of us have equally that demands equal treatment: we all have a human nature. Racism and sexism are wrong because they pick out external differences and ignore the underlying similarity between men and women, blacks and whites. And my concern is for your rights as a woman, that you can vindicate them against the will of the majority, but you can only vindicate your rights if you base them on your human nature. But the unborn also has that same human nature, so shouldn’t we protect him from discrimination just like we protect minorities and women?

Human Rights abortion, intrinsic-value, pro-life, Steve-Wagner

I was browsing through twitter follow lists the other morning and found someone joking about birth control pills being cheaper than children. Of course most people laugh when they hear such things, because parents know the expense of raising children. We often comment on the amount of time, treasure and talent it takes to raise them properly. 

The problem with joking about the cost of birth control in any form is that it easily leads to saying abortion is cheaper than children.  We put a value upon a life – something we find repugnant when done by slavers or pimps.  The Pill is simply not the only thing called “Birth Control”. Planned Parenthood and many others explicitly call abortion “birth control”. Statistically almost 50% of abortions performed today are used in place of other contraceptive methods, because women are coming back for second or third abortions in the USA, while other countries, it’s even greater.

I’m pretty sure that the twitter commenter wasn’t thinking about abortion, but it’s the overwhelming sense that children aren’t welcomed as a natural and desirable part of sexual intercourse that pervades our society today.

As the kids get older – they understand that.

Human Rights birth-control, intrinsic-value, kids, pro-life

Or watch what they say on twitter!

Some sample comments from Twitter’s Search stream:

 

LisFace: Oh great the pro life march is making it impossible for me to get home.

 

extrapickles: Just left longworth (house office building) only to run into a HUGEpro-life protest at supreme court.. Its like 70% white kids under 25

  

RaptorH: Scary – the park across from my office now swarming with pro-lifemarchers getting on their buses to go home.

  

Timothyjemal: Watching a massive pro-life demonstration on Capitol Hill.

It also looks like there needs to be a lot more education, particularly when it comes to FOCA:

  

nicolebaker: I actually support FOCA – easier access to birth control would result in fewer abortions. That should appease both pro-life and pro-choice

Perspective march for life, pro-life

Does anyone else think Sarah Palin might be a great advocate for the the pro-life movement?

Leadership Palin, pro-life

….we tell ourselves, and what they do to us. Jennifer Fulwiler takes a look at how she became pro-life.

[HT:Dawn Eden of Dawn Patrol]

Inspiration abortion, pro-life, repentence

Jill Stanek posted a story about a true Polish hero, Irena Sendler who was instrumental in saving nearly 2500 Jewish children from the Warsaw Ghetto during WWII. A truly amazing story and a beautiful woman.

At the end of her post, Jill made a comparison between this woman and activists within the pro-life movement:

Such a beautiful woman and story. Someday many in the pro-life movement, like sidewalk counselors outside abortion mills, will be similarly honored.

The comments section soon blazed.

I’m hoping here to add a perspective that adds some light, and a lot less heat.

In 1991 I walked the ground of the Warsaw Ghetto area for six weeks. Among the dilapidated remaining buildings, complete with bullet holes and other signs of combat, I saw continued anti-semitism, particularly against the synagogue where I was conducting computer training.

One summer, when I was 12, I saw enough of the concentration camps through B&W footage at a local college to know I didn’t want to visit those camps when co-workers invited me to join them in 1991. Those who had visited the camps woke from horrible nightmares for weeks after.

Jill’s post is a fallacious equivocation – a comparison between these two situations – the nightmare of the Warsaw Ghetto/Holocaust, and the genocide of the unborn.

They aren’t the same. And we shouldn’t paint them as such.

One could draw many comparisons, but the differences are primarily in the overwhelming despair and state imposition of the Holocaust and the distributive nature of the decisions made by millions of women for the genocide of the unborn. Each genocide has an incidious nature, but Jill’s efforts, the amazing numbers of PRCs, the efforts of so many pro-life proponents in a land where people still have freedom to choose (with caveats), speaks to the light that shines brilliantly, whereas Europe was immensely dark at that time.

What makes Irena so special was her duty to save lives, at the continual extreme and imminent danger of losing her own.

While sidewalk counselors may be exposed to extreme hatred and potential violence, our rule of law still protects their rights as citizens, when all hope of such protection was missing in Poland at that time.

Perspective abortion, holocaust, Irena Sendler, pro-life