Campus and Radio Pro-Abortion Advocates (REBUTTED)

Hey everyone. A few weeks ago, I shared some clips of me engaging pro-choice advocates in dialogue on Catholic Answers Live. I thought it’d be fun to share another example of that, that I had partnered with my friend and colleague, Joe Heschmeyer, to show you how to dialogue about this difficult issue and also share with you an encounter that I had at the University of New Mexico, all the way back in the mid 2000s. This is when I first got my start doing pro-life apologetics just straight out of college. So you’ll get to see me in the thick of it on a college campus, where I started learning in the field, how to engage people on difficult issues. So here are those conversations. Check them out.

Let’s see. I think changing the law would be counterproductive because a law doesn’t establish that something won’t happen. And does everybody agree that laws are broken? Right? So it would happen anyway.

So you’re saying we shouldn’t have laws because they get broken?

No. I’m saying that we should do this in the most humane manner possible. Is it better to do it with a coat hanger or is it better to do it in a hospital?

Does the child end up the same way though?

Excuse me?

Does the child end up the same way regardless of how they’re dismembered?

Well, yeah. They do. But if you do it in a hospital, doesn’t the woman have a chance to survive too and isn’t all life equally important?

So there’s no possibility of a third, non-violent option where women choose to give birth and they and their children are taken care of in a civilized society?

Well, I’m saying if they don’t want the child, they’re not going to have the child. So why should you have to force them to have it?

Well, I don’t know if we could phrase it that way but I’m saying is shouldn’t we force parents from hurting their children, at least outside of the womb like knocking them around, abusing them, giving them drugs.

Wait. Say your point again.

Shouldn’t we force parents to not hurt their children through abuse such as…

That analogy doesn’t work because what you have is two completely different situations. You have a child that’s being beaten. That’s like a law. It’s not murder. It’s not.

Kind of looks like murder to me.

All right. So I noticed there are a lot of women around here. So I would like you to pick one of these women. Look her in the eyes and I would like you to tell her that if she gets pregnant, you want her to spend nine months with her belly swelling up. You want her to have that kid. You want her to take that kid, probably want her to drop out of school. You, very well, would like her to ruin your life just to satisfy your smug sense of morality that unborn children are full humans and they’re not just part of the woman.

Would you be willing to point to a picture of an unborn child on there and say that is purely medical waste and has no value whatsoever?

Yes. I would because that’s what I believe.

No comment.

Well, you see, I don’t believe…

Unborn child. Women don’t have an abortion.

No woman did that because she loved it. No woman did that because she thought I want to kill my baby. They did that because they had no other option. They did it because they had to. Have you ever been raped or abused or put down in any way? Have you ever had no options? Probably not. Mr. Smug. Probably not.

Actually, it’s Horn but we could keep going.

Great. Wonderful. You’re so funny. Oh my God. It’s hilarious. Abortion. No. Women don’t do that because they love killing babies.

Have I said that they love killing babies?

Yes. You’re pretty much putting that up there as though all women are murderers who do that. Some women don’t have a choice. Not all women live in suburbia in some great place where they can take care of their babies. Some women live in housing projects. Some women are on welfare and food stamps and have Medicaid. Some women can’t take care of themselves or the children they have now, much less those children.

So if they can’t take care of the children they have now, would you be in favor of them euthanizing those children so they don’t have to suffer?

That’s a dumb ass [censored] to say.

I do understand it’s a dumb question but could you tell me why it’s dumb?

I’m not going to do that. Yeah. I’m not going to do that. You’re being ridiculous but come on. You put all this crap up here.

I don’t think I’m being ridiculous at all. The solution you’re offering for difficult life problems is a violent one and I just offered another violent one and you said it was stupid. You’re saying that abortion should be legal for these problems.

Any solutions. I’m saying…

You’re not offering any solutions.

You judge these women because you don’t know and you haven’t been there.

When I asked everyone to look to the person, you’re right and the left, are they alive? And if so, how do you know that? Well, one, we could show they’re alive because they respond to stimuli. They’re growing. We’re metabolizing energy. But then again, these trees are alive, bugs are alive. What’s the big deal?

Would you agree that everyone here who’s standing and listening is a human being or a member of the human species?

Yeah. Yes. Yes.

How do you know that they’re human?

We’re bipedal. We have five fingers, five toes, four limbs.

So you’re saying someone here who had only eight fingers or three limbs wouldn’t be human?

No. It depends. I mean, it’s the genetic code that gives them…

Okay. So everyone out here is alive and they have a human genome or a human genetic code. So what I’m saying is if a fetus is alive, it’s an organism with a human genome that it is a human being like us and I’m just saying they should be treated like I would treat you or you would treat me, hopefully, with just equality and not violating rights. Does that make sense?

Yeah. It does.

In this clip, my colleague Joe Heschmeyer and I engage a pro-choice caller on the very day Roe vs. Wade was overturned.

Hi. I had kind of a question because I haven’t heard anyone kind of bring up the fact that maybe not in all cases this is a good thing. You’re kind of waving your hand and saying haha. We won. Look at this. It’s great for everyone. I listen. Donald Trump, it’s not like God voted for Donald Trump. 50% America put him in. He happened to put three people in the Supreme Court that believe what he believes and believe what 50% of America believes but that doesn’t mean it’s everyone’s belief. And to sit there and say we’ve won, what a joyous day, somebody lost.

If someone’s winning, someone’s losing. And if you don’t acknowledge that and if you don’t acknowledge the fact that maybe this isn’t great for everyone, for the thirteen-year-old girl that gets raped by her uncle or for the college girl that gets raped at a party and doesn’t want that child and doesn’t want that pain, that they’re going to have to live with all their life, either way. The funny thing is the men can walk away and most do and I haven’t heard anyone bring this up. I don’t know if they’re afraid and I don’t know if you want to hear it. I’m impressed you took my call. So I am…

Oh. Yeah. No. No. I actually agree with part of what you’re saying. Certainly, America is deeply divided on abortion. That’s actually a point they make repeatedly in the Dobbs case. It’s one of the reasons why you’re not going to leave it up to nine justices to decide this for everybody. That’s not how controversial close social issues ought to be, kind of, adjudicated.

But second, yet, I think, repeatedly, we’ve said pregnancy is often very difficult. I think even in two of the last three questions we took, we kind of acknowledged this is something that’s really painful. People have reasons why they’re supporting abortion. But nevertheless, the fact that a lot of people support it doesn’t mean that this victory is actually a loss.

So the USCCB had a great line. They said this is a historic day in the life of our country, one that serves our thoughts, emotions, and prayers. For nearly 50 years, America has enforced an unjust law that has permitted some to decide whether others can live or die. This policy has resulted in the deaths of tens of millions of preborn children, generations that were denied the right to even be born.

Likewise, America was deeply divided on the issue of slavery. It doesn’t mean we have to say well, maybe abolishing slavery was bad for slave owners. No. No. The ability of some people to decide if others get to live or die like this, that was an unjust legal regime and we’re glad that legal regime is gone.

At the same time, we’re sympathetic to those who a pregnancy may be really disruptive. To the issue of rape, because I hear this brought up a lot, I would say this. In this country, we don’t have the death penalty for rape and I’m glad we don’t have the death penalty for rape, as horrible as that crime is. It would be even more horrible to have the death penalty for the child of a rapist and one of my friends in grade school was the daughter conceived in rape. I wouldn’t say she should be killed because the circumstances of her conception were horrible. That’s not a just or sane legal regime.

We can, nevertheless, prosecute rape. In fact, I would point out here abortion is often a tool of covering up rape. The pregnancy of an underage girl is proof-positive of at least statutory rape, if not just non-straight out, violent rape.

This FLDS case with Warren Jeffs, that’s a really big Netflix documentary right now. The way they busted him was because there were these underage girls who were giving birth. And so, it put beyond any dispute the fact that these women were being sexually abused and raped. And so, outlawing abortion is something that should be good by taking away one of the tools by which rapists cover up their crimes.

But the thing you said when you said that the nine justices, but you said nine people made a mistake to allow other people to kill an unborn child. Well, the justices are doing the same thing.

No. No. They didn’t outlaw abortion. They just put it back to legislative bodies. Now the people can actually, yeah. Go ahead.

Trent Horn wants to get in. Trent, go ahead.

Yeah, Mark. I just have a question for you. Would you support a law banning abortion if it had exceptions for rape and, let’s say, the life and health of a mother? Would you support a law that outlaws abortion in the other cases?

I think, and it’s hard to wave your hand and say that these cases…

Okay. Then let me ask you, let me rephrase it. Mark. Are there any abortions, throughout nine months of pregnancy, that you think should be illegal?

Yes. I think when the fetus is viable to live on its own without the host, its mother, that at that point, you’ve reached a point where you’ve chosen to carry a life to the point where it could survive and I think that to say at conception, it’s a life. So if someone fertilizes an egg and then saves that egg in a freezer somewhere, so they’ve frozen that life, should that be illegal?

Well…

Okay. So Mark, I’m trying to understand your position. You’re saying that when the baby is only dependent on one person, it’s okay to kill him or her. But when the baby is just dependent on some person because an infant isn’t viable, right, they’ll die if you leave them alone, if they’re dependent on some person, it’s wrong to kill them. But if they’re only dependent on one person, it’s okay to kill them. Is that your position?

See, and here’s how you sit there and say it, you throw it and you say kill them.

Well, that’s…

If you’re taking them from a living state to a non-living state through an intentional action, what term would you use for that?

If the umbilical cord at 12 weeks broke, got pinched, something medically occurred, would that fetus, at 11 weeks, continue to survive?

No. What would happen to the fetus?

It would die.

So if you went in there, so you’re right. If the cord detached naturally … Hold on Mark. If the cord detached naturally, this living human being would die. So if you went in there with tools and dismembered that fetus, what do we call it when you actively do something that takes a living thing and makes it non-living? Is that not the definition of the word kill?

Sure. Let’s go with that.

Okay. So your argument was it should be legal to kill an unborn human being simply because they’re very dependent on one person but it’s not okay to kill them when they’re an infant, when they’re very dependent on many people. Why does the fact that they’re very dependent on their moms mean it’s okay to kill that child? Why does the fact that one person has power over a dependent human, why does that give them the right to kill that human?

The way you’re putting it is you are saying this is what everyone shall do and you have become the judge. And at what point did Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, say ‘Hey, guess what? You’re the judge.’

Well, Mark. You didn’t answer my question. My point is I’m trying to understand your position. You’re saying…

I think that they should have a choice. I think that the women that are out there…

A choice to do what? A choice to do what?

…should have a choice…

To kill a baby.

…to keep or abort a child that was, yes. I do. I 100% do.

Why? Because they’re…

Because that is their choice. Not your choice. Not my choice and not Donald Trump and three judges’ choice or five judges’ choice.

Is it their choice because they’re bigger, because they’re bigger and stronger and the child can’t fight back and it’s totally dependent on them? It should be their choice because of that.

It should be their choice because it is their bodies.

But didn’t we already establish it’s not their body?

We’ve got a bunch of men. Well, hold on. So we’ve got a bunch of men that are out there sitting there saying after I get her pregnant, it’s technically, not necessarily, my responsibility.

Who’s?

There are a bunch of them.

Well, Mark, do you think…

Yeah. They are.

Hold on.

They’re not Christian men that are saying that though.

Mark, should men be compelled to pay child support?

Oh my God. Is every Christian man perfect?

Mark, should a man be compelled to pay child support for a child that he fathers?

Yes. 100 freaking percent.

Yes.

Why?

It should be more than just paying child support.

Why Mark?

He should be with that child.

Why Mark?

Why?

Why?

Why?

What if he says he doesn’t? It’s his future. He doesn’t want to.

Well, then he’s probably not a Christian man. Right?

No.

Christian men…

So Mark, I’m going to tie this together because I think this should be evident for people listening. You have a very strong moral intuition. If a man causes a child to come into existence, he should support the child he has created. And so, we compel him to do something like pay child support and yet you don’t have the same standard for the mother of those children.

You want the father to be held responsible saying he has to care for this child but the mother should be allowed to kill the child because it is her choice and she’s bigger and the child’s very dependent on her and I think that this is very instructive for people to see the pro-life position, which is that all human beings should be treated with equal dignity and respect and cared for, and the pro-choice position, which basically says might makes right and I think that the Dobbs decision today has shown that one of those positions promotes a civilized society and the other promotes barbarity.

And so, I think that more democratic processes, as we debate this issue, I think this will become more clear as we continue the conversation about abortion and I’m glad that Dobbs vs. Jackson allows us to do that but thanks for calling in.

A great call to end on. Joe Heschmeyer, Trent Horn, thank you both very, very much.

Thanks for watching today’s episode. If you want more great content, be sure to check out these other great episodes and don’t forget to like and subscribe to help our channel grow. Finally, if you want to help us create more content like this, please support us at TrentHornPodcast.com.