An abortionist's upside-down logic

By Phil Lawler ( bio - articles - email ) | May 22, 2012

Abortionist Willie Parker told a sympathetic interviewer from the Washington Post why he opposes a bill that would outlaw the destruction of unborn babies after 20 weeks of gestation. If you believe his argument, Parker is motivated entirely by his empathy for people in need—not at all by the considerable income he derives from performing late-term abortions. He explains:

These laws put providers in a position where they have to turn away patients who have great need. I also think they ­create this impression that abortion providers are callous and allow people to conflate murder and abortion. People feel morally justified to say “this is wrong” because they’re led to think it’s close to murder. I think that jeopardizes us, by conflating abortion with an issue that would cause moral outrage.

The logic here is remarkable. The people promoting this legislation, we are told, are trying to make abortion an issue that causes moral outrage. But why are they doing that? Because they are morally outraged by abortion. Confused? There’s more to come. The legislation might make people think that abortion is like murder, Parker says. Why? Because abortion is the deliberate destruction of a living human being, which is what we commonly call murder.

In this astonishing argument, Parker has completely reversed cause and effect. He suggests that the legislation causes the outrage, when in fact the outrage causes the legislation. He suggests that the legislation prompts people to think of abortion as murder, when in fact the legislation is proposed by people who recognize abortion as murder.

The Post interviewer lets these logical somersaults go unchallenged. Do you suppose a major urban newspaper would be equally willing to tolerate the claim that speed-limit signs on highways make people think that cars are going too fast?

Hat tip to Kathleen Gilbert at LifeSite News.