Don’t let your opponents get away with simply asserting a bunch of things they never have to defend. Make them formally state their case.

When your opponent makes an assertion rather than a formal argument, the burden of proof is on them to defend their own assertion, not on you to refute it. Knowing that makes all the difference in a conversation you might have on abortion.

The pro-life argument is either sound or unsound. Dismissing it with a phony appeal to tolerance is not going to work.

When Christians engage politically, they are doing so for the right reasons: that of loving their neighbor and promoting human flourishing.

On today’s episode, we dissect a commenter’s arguments against the pro-life stance. We learn to use logic and our syllogism to reveal the fallacies in his reasoning.

It’s not pro-lifers who refuse to protect children once they’re born. It’s pro-abortion Democrats.

The pro-life argument stands on its merits, not the behavior of the person making the argument. Whether I hate women or love them is irrelevant to the question, “what is the unborn?”

Lazy dismissals of the pro-life argument will not work long-term. It might score you brief political points, but overtime your influence wane.

Christians need to avoid a technological morality that says, “Just because we can do it, we ought to do it.” IVF is technologically doable, but it doesn’t mean Christians should rush into creating children using a method that is an ethical minefield.