Pro-abortion reasoning isn't logical

Richard Dawkins recent remarks regarding the morality of aborting children with Downs syndrome (he thinks it is immoral not to abort them), laid bare another truism about abortion--when you try and give a reason as to why abortion is okay, it does the exact opposite. You realize that it is not okay.

The other recent controversial reason for abortion that fell flat, was of course, sex selection abortion.

In this article Peter Franklin speculates about what other factors might be a trigger to abort, and ultimately where will it end.

"Before long, we might have the ability to test for all kinds of genetic traits. So, how many congenital disabilities would we put on the kill list – some of them or all of them? And what about other potentially detectable conditions – a predisposition to depression for instance? Mental illness certainly adds to the sum of human suffering, but in relentlessly enforcing a standard of psychological normality what would we be losing? 

And what about other characteristics that can’t be described as medical conditions of any kind, but which might be associated with lower levels of happiness compared to the norm – for instance, membership of a minority defined by, say, ethnicity, sexual orientation, degree of physical attractiveness or IQ level?"

So I am pleased that Dawkins has chosen to put his abortion thoughts to paper or more accurately, the twittersphere. When the pro-abortions do this, it always helps the pro-life position. Because when they have to explain those beliefs instead of getting away with their usual "abortion is a woman's choice", their reasoning ultimately falls apart. When forced to defend their beliefs, people quickly grasp how incongruent they are.

In fact one could say the pro-abortions are helping us.