The consent argument is the most popular and vigorously-defended way for pro-abortionists to show that abortion is ethically justified—and that the abolitionist position is unreasonable. But what if their argument trades on hidden ethical concessions that, in any other situation, we’d think were psychopathic?
Are most Americans helping themselves to a double-sized portion of cognitive dissonance along with their Turkey and cranberry sauce?
An almost painfully simple argument (just 3 parts, and 3 extra bits if you want them) showing unequivocally that abortion is morally (if not legally) equivalent to murder.
A 6-step argument showing that the bishop of Rome doesn’t have the credentials required to hold his office.
A 5 (and a bit) step argument showing that the Catholic Church is not a legitimate Christian church because its leadership does not meet certain basic biblical requirements.
A quick little argument showing how, on Rome’s own terms, Catholics believe that God’s secret identity is Allah.
A response to Stuart’s assertion that God’s wrath and hatred is exclusively reserved for sins, rather than sinners.