In his May 22 letter, Erik Larson makes two fallacious arguments regarding abortion.
Due to space limitations, I respond to only his second argument in which he claims only those who hold the pro-life position and are willing and able to “pay $1,000 per month in child support for the next 18 years,” for an otherwise- aborted life, have a voice in the debate.
This is clearly an ad hominem attack rather than a logical argument in favor of abortion. He could make the same attack against an abolitionist who seeks the end of slavery. Larson could claim that the abolitionist has no standing to argue against slavery unless the abolitionist is willing to hire a newly freed slave for the next 18 years.
However, clearly, the abolitionist’s argument that slavery is immoral does not depend on whether he is able or willing to hire a slave. Just so, the pro-life argument that abortion is immoral stands on its own regardless of whether the pro-lifer is able or willing to pay child support.
And just for the record, my wife’s parents adopted two sons when they were young boys. So my parents-in-law have paid Larson’s child-support tax; in Larson’s debate, even he must concede that they have earned their pro-life voices. Will he now listen to their argument?