Indefensible logic supports many an argument. My mentor noted a few years ago his Seminary education, even is college experience, would have been better had it included a good dose of logic. I agree. My friend Greg Horton helps Freshmen and Sophomore college students think through their arguments in his Composition 2 classes. Maybe we would all be helped if we addressed this need in Senior English in High School. I suspect it would help some arguments, even some of my own.
Marty closes his post with this,
In an essay last year in Slate, William Saletan admits what defenders of children have long argued: there is no logical difference between the killing of an unborn child and a born child. Says Saletan regarding the euphemistically termed “after-birth abortion”:
The case for “after-birth abortion” draws a logical path from common pro-choice assumptions to infanticide. It challenges us, implicitly and explicitly, to explain why, if abortion is permissible, infanticide isn’t.Yes, William, it does.
I would add it also challenges you to own it and admit it. Your ilk has long said pro-lifers only care about unborn children, not born ones. It is clear now that those who support the infanticide called after-birth abortion care about neither.
If you have not already, click over and give Marty’s post a read and be sure to watch the video. Then, head over to Protecting Infants. New content will be added in the days ahead.