As a regular Catholic Answers Live listener, I greatly appreciate the clarity, power, and sensitivity Trent Horn has brought to the discussion. Although I haven’t read his latest book on the topic, I hope to soon.
What motivates me most concerning the pro-life cause, is the knowledge that though they may comprise a small number, on a regular basis our well developed unborn young are savagely murdered in what can only be a terror-ful death.
This is not to say that abortion at any stage is justified - I think it is just the opposite - ignoring the basic truths of the pro-life argument for all our unborn young empowers and enables the most horrific murders of the older unborn.
The basic truths are mostly unassailable - the biology is clear and the personhood argument merely begs the question (Who can we abort? -non-persons. Who are non-persons?-those we can abort.) and the overpopulation argument is untrue and grotesque.
Remaining is the obligation issue. Do parents, in particular mothers, have an obligation to carry the unborn to term? It strikes me that the pro-life side typically avoids this question. To Mr. Horn’s credit he does address it and does so very well but even he doesn’t seem to appreciate and acknowledge that this is planned parenthood et al’s only feasible argument.
And even from the pro-choice side, it strikes me that they don’t relish discussions on the obligation issue, rather preferring a strategy of mostly contrived ambiguity on the abortion topic as a whole.
I think the pro-life argument is that parents have the same obligations to their unborn children as they do to their born children. Yet I don’t see the broader pro-life movement advocating this point and we seldom use the word ‘obligation’ or engage this aspect of the issue. Are we afraid it is too confrontational, too burdensome? Can we expect to advance the truth if we avoid it? And what are all the reasons supporting the contention that this moral obligation is strong enough to justify making abortion illegal?