Should abortion be legal? Scott Klusendorf vs Nadine Strossen

Abortion can be a complicated issue, but the nice thing about Scott is that he cuts right to the core of the debate and makes sure to clarify what each side is saying. He strips away the rhetoric and gets down to the real arguments on each side and  the pro-life side comes out on top.

Relevant  resources

Recently, Scott taught two classes on the techniques that he uses when debating abortion.

The first talk was on Tactics. Here is the PDF. In the handout, Scott explains how to use questions to make your opponent give reasons for their views instead of just asserting them.

The second talk was on Relativism. Here is the PDF. In the handout, Scott explains what moral relativism is, and some of the problems with the view.

You can find out more about Scott’s organization, the Life Training Institute, on their web page. He is the #1 pro-life debater in the United States, in my opinion. I have met Scott, and he is someone I personally admire. His book “The Case for Life” is the best introduction to pro-life apologetics that you can get. With that book, anyone can learn to be confident and bold when defending the right of unborn children to live.

2 thoughts on “Should abortion be legal? Scott Klusendorf vs Nadine Strossen”

  1. What bothers me is that if a rover on Mars discovered a single cell organism, the science world would be abuzz about the discovery of life.

    But discover a single cell organism in the human uterus, and they refuse to recognize it as life.



  2. LoneWolfArcher:

    Many do recognize that the zygote etc. are living organisms, but they debate the issue of ‘when does this living organism become not just any organism – but a morally valuable organism?’

    Killing ants is not really morally reprehensible (although doing so for fun may seem kind of bizarre none-the-less), but killing a whole human being is.

    So the question is: Is a zygote a whole human being or not? That is, is it a morally valuable entity or not?

    And so some claim that value comes from having certain functions, abilities, etc. (pain, feeling, emotions, certain brain states, self-consciousness, etc.) Others make similar assertions.

    “Pro-life” proponents, however, would claim that value comes in virtue of being a human. That is, the right to life is an essential human right. The only criteria for owning or having a human right applied to one’s self is if one is a human being. A zygote is a full human being, therefore, it has the essential human right to life – just as any other human would – whether big, small, smart, dumb, developed, not developed, dependent, independent, etc.

    But I think your point is a good one in that many just don’t care about being consistent on this issue.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s