Three cheers for the We Want the Debate people! For they are provoking a reaction. Here “We Want the Debate” meets “We really, really don’t want the debate,” in the person of Joyce Arthur, who, ironically, I just debated on abortion in the developing world.
I’ve debated Joyce Arthur about why maternal health strategies in the developing world should not include abortion. But I’d love to see her debate someone like Stephanie Gray of the Centre for Bioethical Reform. I suspect Joyce wouldn’t, however, and it has everything to do with the weakness of her position, which would be sadly exposed in debate with the formidable Stephanie Gray. (I am not so formidable.) Otherwise, why wouldn’t she debate it? If a position is strong and defensible, I can hardly understand why you wouldn’t get out there and make sure people know it and learn about it. Look, pro-choice support is generally waning…it would be really wise if those who ardently support it got out there to beef up their numbers.
I appreciate people who are not apathetic. In that sense, I appreciate Joyce, though we would both agree that we have nothing in common on this issue. But pro-lifers are out there, making their views known, up and at ’em, and having lots o’ kids too (for the most part, myself not included). Where will the pro-choice consensus be in years to come if no one defends it publicly? It’s a sad statement on this tenuous “consensus” that the best my opponents can do is never whisper a public word about it, especially not in debate.by