Kerby Anderson

Events over the last two months illustrate how difficult it is to argue for unhindered abortion rights. Put another way, if you were in a debate competition and were given the assignment to defend abortion, you would know that you would have a more difficult time than the person who was given the assignment to defend the pro-life position.

Last month, for example there was the article in The Atlantic with the provocative title: How Ultrasound Pushed the Idea That a Fetus is a Person. The article generated lots of Twitter posts like: “How The X-ray Pushed the Idea That We All Have a Skeleton.” Russell Moore said: “On the phone checking in with my 5 sons. But since some of them were first revealed to us by ultrasound, I can’t vouch that they exist.” If that was not enough, the subtitle of the article originally stated that a fetal heartbeat was “imaginary.” The editors later removed that part of the article.

The Women’s March in January was a reminder that feminism today isn’t so much about male and female equality as it is about sexual autonomy. This is why we heard so much about a woman’s body. Of course, removing a developing baby is not the same as removing a gall bladder or kidney stones. Removing a cancerous tumor will never have a head, face, hands, and a beating heart.

Foundational to the pro-abortion position is a belief that no abortion at any point of the pregnancy should be prevented. So pro-choice advocates find themselves arguing against laws restricting third trimester abortions and partial birth abortion. Even Americans who support some abortion rights are usually repelled by the rhetoric of pro-choice advocates and politicians who cannot even allow laws against abortion at this late stage.

You know the pro-life movement is making progress when proponents of abortion rights have to deny science and common sense to defend their position.