“Abortion: It Kills All the Right People”

“Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you will also be like him. Answer a fool as his folly deserves, that he not be wise in his own eyes” (Prov. 26:4-5).

It’s a shame that those opposing the right to kill unborn children aren’t clever enough or willing to make their case against abortion by using finger-in-the eye approaches.

That is, forcing abortionists to live consistently with their operating assumptions.

take our poll - story continues below

Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?

  • Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Constitution updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Science is Settled

This methodology has been described as “forcing or pushing the antithesis.” For example, instead of calling the procedure “abortion” or the “right to choice,” call it “killing unborn babies” because that’s what it is. It will unnerve the opposition.

Another way to force the antithesis is to show the logical consequences of abortion.

How about, “Help keep abortion legal. It cuts down on crime”? This slogan has some academic muscle behind it. The authors of Freakonomics, a book that has sold millions of copies, assert that there might be a link between legalized abortion and the reduction of crime.1 This approach is logical. If crimes are committed by people who are alive, and you kill some of them before they can commit crimes, crime will be reduced. Since, according to abortionists, an unborn baby is not a person, there wouldn’t be anything immoral about terminating the life cycle of a “fetus.”

It’s a pre-crime remedy along the lines of Philip K. Dick’s Minority Report. Of course, you don’t know who else you’re going to eliminate. Abortion also reduces the number of doctors, policemen, philanthropists, engineers, artists, and future Democrats.

Climate Change extremists are suggesting that limiting the number of children would be good for the environment. They are also arguing that pets contribute to Climate Change. A UCLA study has determined “our dogs and cats are killing the planet” because they are meat eaters. I propose that Climate Changer advocates suggest that instead of keeping pets, Al Gore and Co. should advocate eating our pets.

If you really believe that cats and dogs are the problem, the full commitment means getting rid of your pets. But so as not to waste them, I propose that their meat be used to feed the hungry.

One could argue that prohibiting abortion leads to political freedom…


Read the Rest of the Story at GaryDeMar.com 

Gary DeMar

Gary DeMar was raised in the suburbs of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He is a graduate of Western Michigan University (1973) and Reformed Theological Seminary (1979). He has served as researcher and writer at the Christian Worldview ministry American Vision since 1980 and President since 1984. Today he serves as Senior Fellow at American Vision where he lectures, researches, and writes on various worldview issues. Gary is the author of 30 books on a variety of topics – from "America’s Christian History" and "God and Government" to "Thinking Straight in a Crooked World" to "Last Days Madness." Gary has been interviewed by Time magazine, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, the BBC, and Sean Hannity. He has done numerous radio and television interviews, including the “Bible Answer Man,” hosted by Hank Hanegraaff and “Today’s Issues” with Tim Wildmon and Marvin Sanders. Newspaper interviews with Gary have appeared in the Washington Times, Toledo (Ohio) Blade, the Sacramento Bee, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Marietta Daily Journal, San Francisco Chronicle, The Orlando Sentinel, and the Chicago Tribune.

Please leave your comments below

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.