The growth of scientific knowledge “is causing us to regard the unborn baby as a real person long before birth,” says Mike Samuels in American Family Physician. The pro-life position is supported by empirical, rational arguments that are accessible to everyone.
Robert George of Princeton University has pressed these arguments among the nation’s leading scholars, including well-known deconstructionist Stanley Fish of Duke University. In 1998, George was invited to debate Fish at a meeting of the American Political Science Association: The debate would be about the nature of the evidence for and against abortion. In earlier writings, Fish had dismissed arguments against abortion as based on “religious conviction” alone, while suggesting that the case for abortion is based on “scientific facts.” George’s position held that, on the contrary, the arguments against abortion are based on scientific data that a fetus is indeed human.
George sent his paper to Fish in advance, and then the two joined two hundred other scholars who had gathered for the debate. But the event was cut short at the start when Fish rose, threw his own paper on the table, and announced, “Professor George is right, and he is right to correct me. Today the scientific evidence favors the pro-life position.”
The audience sat in stunned silence.
— Charles Colson and Nancy Pearcey, from How Now Shall We Live?, p. 130