Abortionist Willie Parker Aborts Up to 45 Babies a Day and Claims to be a Christian published on February 22nd, 2017 at 05:05 PM We’re nearing the end of the day, and as promised earlier, I did want to talk about the interview the New York Times Magazine conducted with itinerant abortionist, Willie Parker. As you need to know about the magazine’s motivation is in the headline: “Willie J. Parker Changed His Mind About Abortion.” Of course, it goes […]
Will the American Medical Association Abandon Its Longtime Opposition to Assisted Suicide? published on February 22nd, 2017 at 05:05 PM There are conflicting reports about whether the American Medical Association (AMA) is considering abandoning its longtime position in opposition to physician-assisted suicide and going “neutral.” It is important to realize how vital it is that the AMA not change. The AMA’s longtime stance has been, in part: Physician-assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s […]
Mom Spent 40 Years Looking for Her 4-Day-Old Baby’s Grave and Found It Minutes From Her Home published on February 22nd, 2017 at 05:05 PM After decades of searching, a British mom finally is at peace after discovering the resting place of her newborn daughter’s body. Veronica Thompson gave birth to her daughter Theresa in 1973, but the baby girl was premature and died four days later, the Birmingham Mail reports. Initially, Thompson said she thought her baby girl’s body […]
Indiana Senate Committee Advances Pro-Life Bill to Strengthen Parental Consent on Abortion published on February 22nd, 2017 at 05:05 PM Today the Indiana Senate Judiciary Committee heard testimony on and passed Senate Bill (SB) 404 by a vote of 6-4. SB 404 strengthens current Indiana law regarding parental rights when a minor daughter seeks an abortion. Authored by Sen. Erin Houchin (District 47), this bill will require abortion providers to obtain proof of consent from […]
Snopes Defends Planned Parenthood, Falsely Claims Abortion Biz Offers Prenatal Care published on February 22nd, 2017 at 05:05 PM Sometimes even the fact checkers need fact checked. The pro-abortion bias of the popular fact checking website Snopes came through recently when it claimed pro-lifers are wrong to say Planned Parenthood lied about providing prenatal care. Snopes rated the claim “mostly false,” arguing that Planned Parenthood never said it provides prenatal care at all its […]
The S.L.E.D. Test
The SLED Test is a simple argument against
The pro-life view is that the unborn are
human beings just like you and me. That’s why it’s wrong to kill them. Although many abortion-choice advocates
agree the unborn are human, they deny they are valuable human beings. They think this distinction justifies killing
Often they use personhood language to express this view. They say the unborn might be human, but
it’s not a person.
When confronted with this claim, ask a simple question: “What’s the difference between a human
being and a human person?” They must answer this question. Why? They’ve just made the incredible claim that there
are human beings that can be killed with impunity because they are not persons. What are their reasons for this
view? What’s the difference between a born human and an unborn one that justifies killing the latter?
Abortion-choice advocates typically cite one or more characteristics they believe make a human
being a person. Each of these characteristics fall under one of four categories. You can remember these categories
with the acronym SLED: Size, Level of development, Environment, and Degree of dependency.
Although it’s true the unborn differs from a born human in these four ways, none of them is a
relevant difference. None of them justifies killing the unborn. Consider how each category is irrelevant to human
Do you know how to defend your position on abortion? Do you get
uncomfortable when the topic comes up? Can you back up your views with logic and reason?
Listen to this short excerpt of a talk given by Bio-ethics expert Scott Klusendorf as he explains his
position to a passenger seated next to him on a plane flight.
The unborn is clearly smaller than a born human. It’s hard to reason how a difference in size,
though, disqualifies someone from being a person. A four year-old is smaller than a fourteen year-old. Can we kill
her because she’s not as big as a teenager? No, because a human being’s value is not based on their size. She’s
still equally a person even though she differs in that characteristic. In the same way, the unborn is smaller than
a four year-old. If we can’t kill the four-year old because she’s smaller, then we can’t kill the unborn because
she’s smaller either.
Level of development:
The unborn is also less developed than a born human being. How does this fact, though, disqualify
the unborn from personhood? A four year-old girl can’t bear children because her reproductive system is less
developed than a fourteen year-old girl. That doesn’t disqualify her from personhood. She is still as equally
valuable as a child-bearing teen. The unborn is also less developed than the four year-old. Therefore, we can’t
disqualify her from personhood for the same reason we can’t disqualify the four year-old. Both are merely less
developed than older human beings.
The unborn is located in a different environment than a born human. How does your location, though,
affect your value? Can changing your environment alter your status as a person? Where you are has no bearing on who
you are. An astronaut who spacewalks in orbit is in a radically different environment than a person on the planet.
No one could reasonably deny his personhood simply because he’s in a different location. Scuba divers who swim
under water and spelunkers who crawl through caves are equally as valuable as humans who ride in hot-air balloons.
If changing your environment can’t change your fundamental status, then being inside or outside a uterus can’t be
relevant either. How could a 7-inch journey through the birth canal magically transform a value-less human into a
valuable person? Nothing has changed except their location.
Degree of dependency:
The unborn is dependent upon the mother’s body for nutrition and a proper environment. It’s hard to
see, though, how depending upon another person disqualifies you from being a person. Newborns and toddlers still
depend upon their parents to provide nutrition and a safe environment. Indeed, some third-world countries require
children to be breast fed because formula is not available. Can a mother kill her newborn son because he depends on
her body for nutrition? Or, imagine you alone witnessed a toddler fall into a swimming pool. Would you be justified
in declaring him not valuable simply because he depended on you for his survival? Of course not! Since the unborn
depends on his mother in the same way, it’s not reasonable to disqualify his value either.
Notice that although toddler and teens differ from each other in the four SLED categories, we don’t disqualify
toddlers from personhood. Since born and unborn humans differ in exactly the same ways, we can’t disqualify the
unborn from personhood either.
The SLED tactic exposes the argument for abortion for what it really is: unjust discrimination.
Abortion-choice advocates deny that all human beings are valuable and deserve protection. Which ones don’t qualify?
The ones that are too small, not developed enough, in the wrong location, and are too dependent on other people. In
other words, the human beings that satisfy the SLED Test’s criteria are the ones that don’t make the cut.
These four characteristics, though, are arbitrary and allow the strong to disqualify the weak,
vulnerable, and defenseless. Sadly, history is crowded with similar examples. African Americans were victims of
discrimination. They were a class of human beings that was disqualified from being valuable based on an arbitrary
characteristic: their skin color. Jews were also were victims of discrimination. They were a class of human beings
that was disqualified from being valuable based on an arbitrary characteristic: their ethnicity. Today, the unborn
are victims of discrimination. They are a class of human beings that are disqualified from being valuable based on
arbitrary characteristics: their size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency.
The pro-life position, on the other hand is an inclusive view. It says no human being – regardless
of size, skin color, level of development, race, gender, or place of residence – should be excluded from the
community of human persons. This view of humanity is inclusive and wide open to all, especially to those who are
small, vulnerable, and defenseless.
"Sadly, most Americans don’t even realize that large numbers of
consumer products on our supermarket shelves contain ingredients which have been
aborted human fetal cell lines.This information is not hard to
find.But people donot like to talk
about it.There are price lists for
human fetal tissue all over the Internet. You can find one
here. So does
it bother you that aborted babies are being chopped up and sold to researchers all over
America?Or are you perfectly
fine with it?"
food corporations use tissue from aborted babies to manufacture flavor additives in processed
Yes, they are selling baby parts. There are literally hours of unedited video of them
haggling over specific pieces in Planned Parenthood offices across the country. But don't let the truth get in the
way of a good old fashioned false debate...