Relational apologetics is the art of cultivating friendships with people who are different from you, where you can have many conversations about a controversial topic about abortion. This can often be more effective than single conversations on a college campus because you can build rapport and trust with the person, and have more time to discuss the hurdles that are blocking someone from changing their mind about an issue like abortion.
Thank you for all the well wishes; my husband and I are indeed thrilled to be awaiting the birth of Baby Geiger in August. (In case you missed the byline, this is your favorite ERI gal Emily Geiger, formerly Emily Albrecht. I got married last November!)
Anyways, I’m thrilled about my pregnancy.
But what if I wasn’t thrilled?
In the days after two little pink lines on a stick announced that there is a tiny human growing inside my body, I couldn’t help but imagine what life would be like if I wasn’t pro-life; if I didn’t know what I do about pregnancy and abortion; if my life circumstances were different and more challenging.
People often have trouble recognizing when two seemingly contradictory statements are both true and not at all contradictory. (Christians ought to have a bit more practice with this, since the nature of the Trinity, for one, is a hallmark example of this kind of thing.) But it’s not enough for things to seem contradictory, nor for someone to just assert that they can’t possibly coexist; it’s important to drill down to what the statements actually mean and whether those meanings are or aren’t compatible. Unfortunately, as is often the case in arguments about abortion, people like to stay at the “seeming” level and share snarky memes rather than engaging in this next level of critical thinking.
And so one side of the debate tells us that abortion is a complex issue, too complex for simply banning it to be an option (but, it bears mentioning, not too complex to label those who oppose abortion as “anti-choice”). Every abortion situation is unique, they say, and every possible regulation on abortion could affect a woman’s life in myriad ways, so it’s best to keep our noses out of other people’s business and simply “trust women!” The other side maintains that abortion is fundamentally simple, and anyone who says otherwise is trying to distract from the fact that “babies are murdered here.” The assumption is that one or the other of these statements is correct; either abortion is simple, or it is complex. The reality, however, is that both statements are true: abortion is a simple issue and a complex issue.
We’re excited to share our newest video series with you! Our Quick Response series is designed to provide answers for many of the most common pro-choice objections in under five minutes. We’re launching this series in a YouTube playlist with a dozen videos, but we have many more that we will be releasing on a weekly basis over the next few months!
If you want a quick reference for how to respond to people who claim the fetus is a parasite, who bring up back-alley abortions, or who talk about consenting to pregnancy, these videos are for you! They’re also perfect for sharing with others to help them understand your views, even on subjects like the Violinist Argument. You can link to them in social media dialogues, watch them to quickly brush up on your dialogue skills, or direct your pro-choice friends to them to get a conversation started. The possibilities are endless!
Here are links to each of the first twelve videos and their scripts; watch them all, or just the one that interests you right now!
We hope you find this to be a resource you can reference repeatedly as you continue to have conversations with different pro-choice people. You can be confident that there are answers to the toughest pro-choice arguments and be equipped as a compelling pro-life advocate. Our Quick Response series is here to help you be even more persuasive in your dialogues about abortion!
Josh responds to three pro-choice people who pushed back against our recent video about the Responsibility Objection, one of the pro-life counter-arguments to Judith Jarvis Thomson’s famous violinist thought experiment. Is this pro-life argument a red herring? Did we strawman Thomson?