On April 25, the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform’s Gregg Cunningham debated Abolish Human Abortion’s T. Russell Hunter on the topic, “Pro-life Incrementalism vs. Abolitionist Immediatism.”

In the scheme of things, the “Immediatist vs Incrementalist” debate between AHA’s T. Russell Hunter and Center for Bio-Ethical Reform’s Gregg Cunningham on April 25, 2015, was iconic. AHA’s immediatist philosophy was laid bare as contradictory, confused, and even nefarious.

Most extraordinary was that Hunter came so ill prepared, after beating his chest for months for prudentialists to “choose a man, and let him come down to fight me,” in the words of Goliath.

Witnessing social movement historian and master debater Cunningham methodically take down each of AHA’s talking points, only to receive such  flummoxed responses by Hunter, was a sight to behold. Cunningham was quick to challenge Hunter’s “conflated” and “binary” arguments, and with no keyboard to hide behind, Hunter’s half-baked theories, groundless accusations, and inaccurate portrayal of history were laid bare.

In a March 13 LifeSiteNews.com article, Canadian pro-life activist Jonathon van Maren quoted Center for Bio-Ethical Reform leader Gregg Cunningham’s observation, that “liked reformers are rarely effective and effective reformers are rarely liked. I often think of this, for obvious reasons, sometimes referring back in my mind to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, which lists the […]

by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli

• At Coming Home, Dr. Gerard Nadal details the perfect storm swirling in Australia (as well as the United States) where empirical evidence on the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link is confronted with an ideology which seeks to suppress the data:
  Melbye, Brinton, and the rest of the NCI coterie deny the validity of their own data (as well as data from all over the globe), data that time and time again substantiate the ABC link. Their sole reason for denying the data in case-control studies (which are retrospective analyses) is the assertion that women who have had induced abortions are more likely to recall them, or report them if they have breast cancer. Dr. Janet Daling who included in one of her studies a test of this putative bias, studied women with cervical cancer and found absolutely no recall bias in her cases or controls. That makes sense because nearly all cervical cancers are caused by human papilloma virus. Janet Daling also publishes with the deniers….

  The issue is the legality of induced abortion and what the frightening specter of breast cancer fifteen or twenty years later might mean. In other words, it’s scientists denying scientific data because of a political agenda.

by Kelli I started to feel uncomfortable about the signs I was standing in front of. So I asked her what she thought. She started crying. She was angry. “No one told me. No one told me it looked like that,” she said in a broken voice. She continued, talking faster now: “All the reasons […]

by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli

• Wesley J. Smith says the bioethics community is finally beginning to criticize artificial reproduction techniques like IVF – but not for the reasons you might think:
  

  But now, in the ever more radical Journal of Medical Ethics, Cristina Richie, of Boston College’s Department of Theology, argues that these technologies should be regulated to limit the number of children – called “carbon legacies,” as a means of fighting climate change.

  Smith opines:
  

  I don’t know if Richie coined the term, but it is ridiculous. Children are children, not bundles of carbon producers…. No, grim is the exploitation of surrogates in biological colonialism and the eugenic impetus that has sunk its fangs deep into the heart of the industry. In the face of such human objectification, sorry, I can’t get upset about global warming.

by Kelli It’s especially bizarre, I think, when those on the Left turn out to enthusiastically celebrate any new revelation of a cultural figure having an abortion. The more they admire the person, it seems the happier they are at the “courage” of said person having had an abortion. A bit unintentionally insulting, don’t you […]