Why pro-choicer's don't debate.....

From time to time many of us would get requests to debate the issue. Here in BC, the head of BC's pro-choice movement, Joyce Arthur, won't debate life issues. Why? I can only sum it up with the following post by Scott Klusendorf. Heh, I wouldn't want to debate him either....

…with Kathryn Kolbert at Lehigh University (PA). As I suspected, she argued along the lines put forth in this piece, all the while insisting that she wanted to reduce the number of abortions without actually banning a single one. But why is she concerned about the high number of abortions if abortion is no big deal? That is, if abortion is morally no different than having your tooth pulled, why be troubled by its high occurrence? She never answered that question. Nor did she answer when I asked “Where does the right to an abortion come from?”

But the big flaw in her argument was elsewhere. Consider her statement in this 1990 essay which she echoed again tonight:

Reproductive freedom means the ability to choose whether, when, how, and with whom one will have children….Reproductive freedom is necessary if all persons are to lead lives of self-determination, opportunity, and human dignity.

Notice the question-begging nature of her claim. She simply assumes, without argument, that the unborn are not human beings. Would she make this same claim for human freedom and self-determination if her neighbor suggested killing toddlers as well as fetuses?

In short, I was willing to buy her argument for freedom and self-determination–but only after she demonstrated that the unborn were not human beings. She never rose to the challenge. In fact, her debate manners were terrible. On three separate occasions, she interrupted my speaking (during my allotted time) and talked right over me. At one point, the moderator gave up trying to control her. Soon after, abortion-choicers in the crowd started hurling insults at me, though I refused to respond in kind. On questions of abortion legality and the provisions of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, I had to correct her faulty legal reasoning. And this from a lawyer I was honored to appear with her at this event...even if we did take opposite positions on this topic.
who argued her case before the Supreme Court? I’ve debated thoughtful abortion-advocates before, but Kathryn Kolbert is not one of them.

Sure, she had her supporters in the audience, but if you were a thoughtful defender of abortion, you did not leave the event proud of your side. I know. The moderator confessed that he was one of them…and he changed his mind on the issue tonight.

For the record, here in Kelowna, many years ago I was proud to debate NDP Eileen Robinson. She is truly a wonderful lady, and we both particpated in a debate at our local College. Eileen had the courgae of her convictions, and I was honored to appear with her at this event...even if we both agreed to disagree.