Explore by Topic
Explore by Format
Search Results | 49 results found
Here's my response to this week's challenge. Here are some related vidoes:
The challenge this week comes from an article titled "How I Lost Faith in the Pro-Life Movement":
Here's my response to this week's challenge. COMMENTS Stand to Reason Blog
The challenge this week is something that was recently said to Alan: Aren't you against abortion just because you're a Christian? You talk about abortion as if you're objectively evaluating the morality of it. But in reality it's your religious views that make you against abortion, not science and not neutral unbiased rationale. If you were Alan, how would you have responded? As always, we want to hear your ideas in the comments below, and then Alan will post his video response on Thursday.
Is there a "gay gene," and should it change our view of homosexual behavior if there is? To many people, saying that homosexuals are born that way is as axiomatic as saying the earth revolves around the sun. No rational reason exists to reject this claim. The only hold-outs, it is said, are those who are either ignorant of scientific facts, homophobic, or bigots (read: Christians). But this claim is beset with problems. Before we consider them, let me make a tactical suggestion.
Abortion is unjustly denying the most fundamental human right to thousands of human beings every day, and we should act to restore justice. It's abortion.
Should you be pro-life? To answer this, you must answer the question “What is the unborn?”
Alan responds to the claim that pro-lifers are inconsistent if they support the death penalty. I am back from vacation. I was out of town, so that’s probably why you haven’t seen me doing challenges in several weeks. Instead, you’ve had to tolerate Brett. It’s funny because he’s 10 or 12 years older than me, so he has to do all those cool things with his family, music, and cool graphics to look young and edgy. I hope he’s been doing a good job with that.
Alan responds to a challenge: If a lab was burning and you could only save a toddler or 10 embryos, which would you save? Since most pro-lifers usually say they would save the toddler, this proves that they don't really believe that human embryos are valuable human beings like the toddler. If you were in a burning lab and you had to choose between saving ten embryos or one toddler, which would you choose? You’d choose the toddler, wouldn't you? That just proves that you don't really think the embryos are valuable human beings like the toddler.
Alan responds to the challenge that if abortion is made illegal, women will die from dangerous, back alley abortions.