Lilly: Abortion column misses mark
Murray Siegel’s June 10th column, “Abortion debate only growing more divisive” contained fallacies of faulty analogy/moral equivalency and false equivocation/redefinition.
Mr. Siegel contrasts a fetus with a “living human,” displaying ignorance of both Webster’s definition and the etymology of the word fetus. He also couldn’t decide whether the fetus represented the kidney or the man himself in his own analogy. Inconsistency is the sign of a failed argument.
Siegel implied that in order to be pro-life, you must ensure “ALL pregnant women and young children have sufficient nutritious food to eat, as well as access to proper health care.” By what standard? As a Christian, I’m called to love my neighbor. But why would this be the case in Mr. Siegel’s worldview? Who gave him the authority to name such specific demands? He never tells us. He just assumes the standard and wants you to accept it.
All the while, the unspoken solution if his demands aren’t met is to kill the babies before they grow up and eat junk food. Mr. Siegel uses the classic euphemism “terminate a pregnancy,” rather than “kill a baby.” This is not level-headed, middle-of-the-road thinking in the midst of wild extremists. This is the foolish worldview promised by God when you reject Christ.
For those who are considering abortion, there is help. For those who have had one, there is forgiveness in Christ. And for Mr. Siegel, that same Jesus can not only save your soul for eternity, he can save your reasoning today.