Trust him on THIS, but NOT THAT!!

I got a mention in these double-posted articles by a Michael Cook:

Abortion Supporters Have to Lie Because They Can’t Defend Killing Babies

We were born with a brain. Why can’t we use it when debating abortion?

I'm not sure sure if it makes any sense for him to basically says this: 

"Trust him on what he says here, but ignore him when he says that anti-abortion arguments are very poor and explains why that's so"! 

Can it? Does it? How?

. . .

Why are these weird arguments being wheeled out to support abortion rights? Why aren’t activists dealing with fundamental issues: is an unborn child human? Is it a person? Does a woman have a right to kill a person? Does abortion lead to human flourishing?

Why are they resorting to smear tactics instead of debate?

A pro-abortion philosopher explained why in a recent issue of the American Journal of Bioethics. Nathan Nobis, of Morehouse College, says glumly that activists are simply not interested in arguments about morality and ethics. They want laws which support their prejudices. They don’t want to think.

An open letter to the media from an American group called Physicians for Reproductive Health exemplifies this. It calls upon journalists to ignore pro-life arguments.

“Medicine and science are not up for debate. Health care is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact. And the fact is, abortion is not in the realm of theory or belief. Abortion belongs in health care, social services, and public health reporting.”

In the United States, everything should be up for debate. Isn’t that democracy?

This aversion to engaging with issues is exactly what Dr Nobis is complaining about. He should know. He is the author, with another philosopher, Kristina Grob, of an easy-to-read book Thinking Critically About Abortion. It analyses the most common arguments for and against abortion and points out their strengths and weaknesses. Unfortunately, he says, the pro-choice crowd is not interested in thinking about the morality of abortion. For them, it is simply a legal issue:

“I have, however, gotten a lot of negative reactions, including from pro-choice people, which leads me to my observation that most vocal pro-choice people do not care about engaging abortion ethics: they believe that abortion is obviously not wrong and that anyone who thinks otherwise is ignorant, ill-motivated, or evil. Some pro-choicers argue it’s offensive to engage people who disagree, claiming that’s like arguing with slaveholders, but forgetting that arguments were given against slavery, which contributed to positive change.

“Abortion-advocacy organizations also appear to have zero interest in engaging in anything about ethics: indeed, they actively avoid the issues.”

He observes that pro-choice advocates were unprepared for Dobbs. For decades they had been promoting a legal right to abortion. Now that the right has been removed – at least in some states — they will have to make ethical arguments – and they don’t know how.

If people were rational, the future would look bright for the pro-life cause.

LifeNews Note: Michael Cook is editor of MercatorNet where this story appeared.