What To Do When Standard Pro-Choice Talking Points Feel Crazy

What do you do when pro-choice talking points feel so stupid or so evil that you don’t even know what to say? I talked in my last blog post about what to do when something is so far beyond the pale that even most pro-choice people would agree with you about it—like if someone actually straight up says it should be legal to kill toddlers to reduce overpopulation. Often if a pro-choice person says something like that, it’s because they feel trapped. So I talked about some strategies for helping them feel safe enough in the conversation to edit what they said if it’s not really what they think.

But there are some things that feel obviously crazy to a lot of pro-life people that don’t feel crazy to a lot of pro-choice people. If the pro-choice person you’re talking with says one of those things, it’s probably not because they feel trapped, but just because it just genuinely doesn’t feel obvious to them the way it does to you.

For example, let’s take a close look at “I know it’s a human being, I just don’t care.” Not every pro-choice person would agree with that (and many wouldn’t put it quite that starkly), but a lot of pro-choice people agree that a fetus is a living human organism, and some will even grant at least for the sake of argument that fetuses are people with equal rights, and they still think abortion should be legal. What’s happening when a pro-choice person says that?

Step 1: Clarify

Step 1 is the same whether you’re dealing with something that feels crazy to most pro-choice people or something that just feels crazy to you—and sometimes it can even help you figure out which of those two buckets you’re dealing with.

If you have lots of dialogue experience and training and you have some guesses about what they might mean, offering multiple plausible, smart options for what they could be saying is a great way to go. It will help reassure them that you’re not trying to straw man them—you genuinely want to understand the smartest version of what they think. But if in the moment you’re genuinely just flabbergasted, you can only think of one thing they might mean, and it sounds genuinely crazy to you, it also works to say something like:

“Do you have more words you can put around that? I want to understand your view accurately, and I’m guessing that the way I’m interpreting that isn’t what you actually mean. What I’m hearing you say is that you know abortion is a horrific human rights violation—that it unjustly kills an innocent person—and you don’t care. But I’m guessing that’s not what you actually mean—can you help me understand you better?”

As you do this, try not to come across as shocked. Fairly or not, pro-life people have a reputation for being sheltered and pearl-clutching. (Think every homeschool stereotype you’ve ever heard.) One really good goal to have in mind as you dialogue is to disrupt the caricature of pro-lifers that the person you’re talking with has in the back of their head. I don’t mean you shouldn’t be deeply grieved by abortion. And once you’ve built up enough rapport in a conversation, it can sometimes be helpful to be transparent about your grief with a pro-choice person. But get to the point where you know enough about what kinds of things pro-choice people tend to think and say that you’re not shocked when you hear them.

Step 2: Have a Map

As you get more dialogue experience and training, one super helpful thing you’ll get more and more able to contribute to the conversation is actually the smartest pro-choice arguments. That may sound counterintuitive—why would you want to make smarter pro-choice arguments? Doesn’t that lose you debate points or something? 

But one thing that happens a lot in abortion conversations, especially with pro-choice people who haven’t thought deeply about their view, is that they say something fuzzy and inarticulate but know that there’s a smart, articulate thought there that they’re reaching for. Often a pro-life person who knows a little bit more about abortion arguments can easily dunk on the fuzzy thing the pro-choice person just said, but that very rarely changes the pro-choice person’s mind (even if you dunk on it gently and kindly). And it actually shouldn’t change their mind—it’s not because they’re being obstinate and closeminded, it’s because on some level they know there’s a smart argument they were trying to express, and you haven’t answered that smart argument yet. If you can help them get to the smartest version of the argument they’re trying to make, then you have a chance to actually answer it, and a much better shot at helping them change their mind.

It’s like having a map of the abortion dialogue in your head. If someone is trying to talk to you about a city and they say “It’s that one with all the movies,” you could make them feel stupid for saying something vague and inarticulate, but that won’t get you very far. Or, you could helpfully say, “Oh, are you thinking of Los Angeles, or maybe Hollywood?” If you can help a pro-choice person get from the fuzzy thing they actually said to the articulate thing they were trying to think of, you’ll be able to have a much more productive conversation.

Step 3: Learn How to Argue for the Obvious

The final skill you need to be able to respond effectively is arguing for the obvious. (For the specific example of arguing that it matters that fetuses are human beings, one really great tool is the Equal Rights Argument.) Usually, if something feels so obvious to you that you don’t even know how to make an argument for it, that’s actually a gap in your own understanding of your view. If you can fill that gap, you’ll be able to meet pro-choice people where they are in a way that can actually help them understand where you’re coming from, and ultimately change more minds and save more lives.


What To Do When It’s So Dumb You Don’t Know What To Say

At a speaking gig last week, someone asked me a really good question: “What do you do when a pro-choice person says something, and it’s so dumb you don’t even know how to respond?” Sometimes an argument can be hard to rebut because it’s so smart. But sometimes an argument can be hard to figure out how to respond to because it feels so obviously bad to you that you’re not even sure how to explain why it’s bad other than to just say “Duh!”

8–12 minutes

Some of you might be thinking at this point, “That’s every conversation with pro-choice people! Their whole argument is that dumb!” If that’s you, I think you’re wrong on that. But if that’s your view, it also means this topic is even more relevant to you than to everybody else— it applies to literally every conversation you have with a pro-choice person.

But that’s not where the person who asked me the question last week was coming from. She knew a lot of the strongest pro-choice arguments, and she had a bunch of experience having smart, mutual, respectful conversations with pro-choice people. But occasionally, someone would say something that just left her speechless, like “I know it’s a human being, I just don’t care,” “A fetus isn’t biologically alive,” or “Yeah, it should be legal to kill toddlers too.”

If you’ve ever talked with a pro-choice person about abortion, you may have run into something similar—something that makes you want to say, “That feels so obviously wrong that I don’t know what to do to help you see it—it’s just obvious!”

I have two different responses in situations like that, but the first step is the same either way.

Step 1: Clarify

Clarifying what you’re hearing your interlocutor say is pretty much never a bad idea, but it’s particularly important when you’re thinking what you heard is crazy.

This could sound like: “I want to make sure I understand where you’re coming from. Is it ok if I repeat back what I’m hearing you say and then ask you to tell me if I’m right or not?” 

Or, depending on how far into the conversation you are and how much rapport you’ve built, it could sound like: “Wait, just to be super clear—you’re saying that to help curb overpopulation we should make it legal for parents to kill their toddlers if they want?”

If you can think of two possible things they might mean and you’re not sure which one they’re going for, it can also be really helpful to offer them both options. For instance, “I want to make sure I understand where you’re coming from, and I can think of two different things you might mean by that. Do you mean you know the fetus is a human being biologically, like that it’s a living human organism, or do you mean something more philosophical—like you know it’s a person with equal rights, you just don’t care?”

Sometimes clarifying will be enough—either because you’ll find out that you were misunderstanding them and they didn’t actually mean the crazy thing to begin with, or because the process of clarifying gave them a chance to reconsider and adjust.

But if you go through the clarification step and what they’re saying still sounds beyond-the-pale crazy to you, the next step depends on the answer to this question: Would almost all pro-choice people agree with you that what the person is saying is crazy? Is it obvious to everyone, or just obvious to you (or people on your side)?

The rest of this post will talk about the really extreme cases where it’s so obviously wrong that the vast majority of pro-choice people would agree that it’s crazy. My next post will talk about the cases where it feels extremely obvious to you, but you know a bunch of pro-choice people wouldn’t see it that way.

Step 2: When most pro-choice people would agree with you

If you trot out a toddler and the pro-choice person you’re talking with says that yes, it should be legal to kill toddlers, let me assure you that the vast, vast (vast!) majority of pro-choice people agree with you that that’s obviously bad. In fact, even the person you’re talking with might agree with you that that’s obviously bad. Sometimes, without realizing it, people say things they don’t actually think because they feel trapped. 

This happened to me once at a high school debate tournament. I don’t remember what the debate topic was (it wasn’t abortion), but my opponent based her argument on consequentialism, which (roughly) says that the end justifies the means. So during cross-examination, when it was my turn to ask her questions to try to poke holes in her argument, I brought up things like the torturous and often deadly medical experiments that Nazis performed on prisoners, without consent or anesthesia. The Nazis were (in part) trying to accomplish some genuinely good goals, like learning how to more effectively save people’s lives. There could even have been some particular experiments where mathematically, more lives were saved as a result of what was learned in the experiment than were killed in the experiment. So I asked her whether the consequentialist view she was defending meant that what the Nazis did was okay. And…she said yes.

I got a sweet, soft-spoken fifteen-year-old girl to say that the Nazis medically experimenting on prisoners was morally permissible. I spent most of my rebuttal pointing out exactly how horribly and obviously false that was, and then when it came time for my opponent’s rebuttal she stood up, started to cry, forfeited the debate, and said “I just want to be really clear that I don’t actually think what the Nazis did was okay.” She hadn’t said yes to my question because that was what she actually thought; she said yes because she felt trapped. I had backed her into a corner, she didn’t know how to get out, and she froze.

In a competitive debate setting, that was a kind of victory (though I definitely felt conflicted about it). In a setting where your goal is to win the argument, getting your opponent flustered so that they say something stupid and then feel like they have to stand by it can help you do that. But outside of very specific settings like competitive debate tournaments, winning debates is a terrible goal. It might help you feel intellectually and morally superior, but it won’t change minds or save lives, and it’s also just not a loving or intellectually virtuous thing to be trying to do. 

People can’t change their minds while they’re feeling defensive and unsafe. If you want a chance to change someone’s mind, you need them to feel safe in the conversation with you. That means you need them not to feel like you’re trying to trick them into saying something stupid so you can pounce on it. You need them to feel like they can reconsider and edit what they said without you making them feel stupid. For that to happen, obviously you need to not actually be trying to trap them or win the debate or make them feel stupid. But often, it takes more than that: often, you also need to go out of your way to be super clear that you’re not trying to do those things.

So: if the pro-choice person you’re talking with says something that’s really obviously wrong, even to most pro-choice people, one good step is to check whether they’re feeling trapped. You can check for that by saying something like

“There’s a thing that can sometimes happen in abortion conversations like this, and I wonder if it might be happening here—sometimes people can end up feeling trapped, feeling like they have to stick to something they said not because it’s what they actually think but because they feel like they don’t know what to say or how their argument could go if they take it back. I’m not saying that’s what’s happening, but in case it is, I just want to be super clear that I won’t think any less of you if you ever want to edit anything you’ve said—we’re both talking off the cuff here. And also just to be super clear, I don’t at all think you have to be pro-life if you say it’s not ok to kill toddlers. I know some really strong pro-choice arguments that are absolutely consistent with saying it’s not ok to kill toddlers, and I’m happy to give them to you.”

If you notice a pattern of people feeling trapped, or feeling like they’re not sure where you’re leading them in your abortion conversations, one good thing to try adjusting is to ask fewer questions. If you’re genuinely trying to make sure you’re understanding something they just said, definitely still ask those clarifying questions (offer them multiple options if you can!). But when it’s your turn to make your own argument, put periods at the ends of your sentences instead of question marks. That can help people avoid feeling like they’re being asked to agree to something without knowing where it’s going.

If you’ve clarified what they said and gently asked whether they’re feeling trapped and they still stand by it, one last move you can try is to point out that most pro-choice people are on your side on this one. If even that doesn’t shift anything, it might be time to end the conversation. I might say something like, “Okay, to be honest I’m not really sure where to go from here. I think we might not have enough common ground in some other areas to be able to have a conversation about abortion. I guess I’d just want to invite you to reconsider your view that killing toddlers is okay—I think the vast majority of pro-choice people would agree with me that it’s obviously wrong to kill toddlers.” I repeat what they said back to them a couple times to let it linger with them and give them as much chance as possible to reconsider later, and then send them on their way.

In my experience, at least in in-person conversations, it’s pretty rare that a pro-choice person says something that egregious and stands by it even after I clarify what they said and check whether they’re feeling trapped. It happens, just not in most conversations. What does happen in most conversations is that pro-choice people say something that sounds so obviously false to a lot of pro-life people that it can be hard to figure out how to respond. Next post, I’ll talk about what to do with things pro-choice people say all the time that feel so crazy to you you’re not sure where to start.

The post What To Do When It’s So Dumb You Don’t Know What To Say” originally appeared at the Equal Rights Institute blog. Subscribe to our email list with the form below and get a FREE gift. Click here to learn more about our pro-life apologetics course, “Equipped for Life: A Fresh Approach to Conversations About Abortion.”   

Jim-Bob the Barber and Arguing for the Obvious

The tiny town of Russell is so small that it only has one barber, a man named Jim-Bob. Since Jim-Bob is the only barber around, he shaves all the men in town who don’t shave themselves. And of course it would be silly to shave a man who already shaves himself, so the only people Jim-Bob shaves are the men in town who don’t shave themselves. Sounds reasonable, right? Wrong. In fact, it’s logically impossible. Jim-Bob literally cannot operate that way, because the concept is nonsense, like the concept of a married bachelor.

Unless you’ve heard of the Bachelor Paradox before (or you happen to have an extremely nerdy philosophy brain), you’re probably confused at this point. My explanation of how Jim-Bob operates sounds perfectly coherent and non-contradictory—why on earth is it nonsense? 

Estimated reading time: 7 minutes

Beauty and Brokenness in the Pro-Life Movement

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

A couple weeks ago, we asked our awesome subscribers to email us and tell us how they’re feeling about the current state of the pro-life movement, and we were blown away by your responses. 77 of you replied, and it was so encouraging for our team to hear from you and connect with you. A bunch of you shared that you felt:

  • Excited that we have more access to great pro-life arguments 
  • Frustrated because good dialogue—the courage to speak up at all, and the calm to stay kind when you do—is really hard
  • Excited because Dobbs gave us the ability to pass state laws against abortion
  • Frustrated because the pro-choice side has a much bigger microphone and budget
  • Excited by the dedication, passion, and commitment they see in the pro-life movement, no matter the obstacles, no matter how laws change over time
  • Frustrated because some pro-life leaders talk in a way that makes it easy for pro-choicers to paint the whole pro-life movement as the pro-everything-Trump-does movement
  • …and many other excitements and frustrations

Were Horton’s Friends Guilty of Attempted Murder?

Photo: A milk thistle blooming in summer

Have you read Dr. Seuss’s Horton Hears a Who? If you’re pro-life, you might have quoted its most famous line: “A person’s a person, no matter how small.” But the story as a whole is…kind of intense. Horton the elephant is in the middle of a relaxing swim, when he hears a very soft voice calling for help. He looks around, but all he sees is a small speck of dust, and he realizes he’s actually hearing a microscopically tiny person (a Who, as it turns out) on the speck calling for his help. The speck is floating toward the water, and the tiny person is afraid he’ll drown. So Horton carefully picks up the speck and places it on a soft clover—because, as Horton says, “A person’s a person, no matter how small.”