Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
utsfl:classroom:seminars:pbs302h [2016/03/23 10:23] – updated notes for Klusendorf balleyne | utsfl:classroom:seminars:pbs302h [2024/03/06 11:43] (current) – put Beckwith above Klusendorf balleyne | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====== PBS302H: The Vanishing Pro-Life Apologist ====== | ====== PBS302H: The Vanishing Pro-Life Apologist ====== | ||
+ | ===== Other ideas / To Sort ===== | ||
+ | Key question: What is this about? It's not about laws or education, it's not about AVP or no AVP, **this debate is about focusing on the child or focusing on the mother.** Some of this ideas don't fit and should be filed elsewhere. | ||
+ | |||
+ | This was a great conversation: | ||
+ | {{youtube> | ||
+ | |||
+ | FIXME Alexis insight: Heart Apologetics is the bridge between apologetics and Paul Swope' | ||
+ | |||
+ | FIXME http:// | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===== Francis Beckwith ===== | ||
+ | http:// | ||
+ | |||
+ | - Mr. Swope is mistaken in thinking that Americans in general have accepted the pro-life view that the unborn are fully human even though they still support legalized abortion | ||
+ | * It is true that polling data have consistently shown that a vast majority of people see abortion as wrong, even morally wrong. But in public discourse they relegate abortion to a question of personal preference, something they do not do when it comes to behaviors they consider seriously wrong, such as spousal and child abuse, torture, and human slavery | ||
+ | - One can question whether the research cited by Mr. Swope is an example of good social science, and whether the inferences he draws from this data are justified | ||
+ | - Mr. Swope does not have counterfactual knowledge of how the world would have been if the pro-life movement had not emphasized fetal humanity from its genesis. Perhaps his approach seems to work because the pro-life movement' | ||
+ | - Even if Mr. Swope' | ||
+ | - Because Mr. Swope admits that women who have abortions oftentimes rationalize what they are doing, how can he trust these women to give an adequate assessment of their own reasons for the abortions he admits are the result of the perverse deliberations of self-interested moral agents? | ||
+ | |||
+ | "Mr. Swope is right that we should do more than stress the humanity of the unborn, but we should not do less. In my judgment, there are three things that must be done in order to facilitate cultural change." | ||
+ | - we must persuade our fellow citizens that the unborn are full members of the human community | ||
+ | - we must show that if the unborn are human persons, one cannot be “pro-choice” on abortion and at the same time maintain that the unborn are fully human, just as one cannot be pro-choice on slavery and at the same time say that slaves are human persons | ||
+ | - we must show, both in word and in deed, that living virtuously and not autonomously is the essence of the moral life. Mr. Swope seems to stress autonomy, the first principle of the abortion culture, rather than virtue, the moral goal of the Gospel of Life. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== Paul Swope' | ||
+ | > I am reminded of the famous line in My Fair Lady, “Why can't a woman be more like a man?” Indeed, why can't women be more like Professor Beckwith? I very much agree with Prof. Beckwith' | ||
+ | > | ||
+ | > If a woman stands on the ledge of a twenty-story apartment building about to jump, believing that this act will end her pain and despair and thus be somehow in her “best interest, | ||
+ | > | ||
+ | > My article stated clearly that other pro-life approaches, such as teaching fetal development, | ||
+ | > | ||
+ | > To Ralph Gillman: It is fair to say that the ads of the Caring Foundation are more emotive than analytic. At the same time, the goal is to help women reconsider, or “rethink, | ||
===== Scott Klusendorf ===== | ===== Scott Klusendorf ===== | ||
Line 38: | Line 71: | ||
http:// | http:// | ||
- | ===== Francis Beckwith ===== | + | > Clearly, the word " |
- | http://www.firstthings.com/ | + | > |
+ | > Our challenge is that we live in a culture that thinks and learns visually. This profoundly effects how people resolve moral issues. [...] | ||
+ | > | ||
+ | > How do we restore meaning to the word " | ||
+ | > | ||
+ | > Instead, we must visually awaken moral sensibilities. Pro-lifers must move the debate from the abstract question of choice of the mother to the concrete issue of the death of the child by using visual aids that allow people to see what abortion is. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== Advocates Victim Imagery | ||
+ | > Some discourage using graphic visual aids on grounds it substitutes emotion for reason. This objection misses the point. The question is not, "Are the pictures emotional?" | ||
+ | |||
+ | > Regarding graphic visual aids, pro-lifers make one of two mistakes. They either spring them on audiences | ||
+ | > | ||
+ | > When using dramatic visual aids like Harder Truth, explain to your listeners in advance that the video contains graphic pictures. Advise them to look away if they prefer not to watch. When talking to a Christian audience, mention that our Lord is eager to forgive the sin of abortion, and that our purpose is not to condemn anyone, but rather to clarify what is actually at stake. |