Winter-Spring 2016

3 Credit Hours

The Ethics of Abortion

On-line Class

Instructor
Office Address & Phone
Office Hours
Email Address
Course
Description

Learning
Outcomes
(Course
Essentials)

PRO-LIFE APOLOGETICS

Scott Klusendorf
770-463-6962
by appointment.
Sklusendorf@numail.org

Successful pro-life apologists are philosophers. They objectively weigh arguments according
to the dictates of sound reason, seeking to understand before offering judgments. They are
intellectually curious, eager to explore all facets of the abortion debate, including responses
from academic critics who hold differing views. Once they understand the major thinkers on
both sides of the issue, they engage the culture with a persuasive pro-life apologetic centered
on four primary objectives. First, pro-life apologists clarify the abortion debate by focusing
public attention on one key question: What is the unborn? Second, pro-life apologists
establish a foundation for the debate, demonstrating to critics that metaphysical neutrality is
impossible and why the substance view of human personsgrounded in theismbest
explains human dignity and equality. Third, pro-life apologists answer objections
persuasively, drawing from science, philosophy, and theology. Fourth, pro-life apologists
teach and equip, translating sophisticated adacemic arguments into language lay people can
grasp. These four tasks are necessary because while the street-level debate over abortion
rages on, a serious intellectual discussion about the foundation for human rights continues
almost unnoticed. What makes humans valuable? Can secularism provide an adequate
grounding for basic human rights? How do natural rights differ from merely positive (legal)
ones? How do war, social justice, and theology impact debates over abortion? In this course,
we will review the major academic thinkers on both sides of the abortion debate, including
the most persuasive critics of the pro-life view. Pro-life apologists should interact with our
strongest critics, not our weakest ones. Only then can we be sure our case is sound.
Moreover, well examine the underlying worldview assumptions that both academic and lay
people bring to debates over abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and cloning. We will
also discuss why the Christian worldview in particular does a better job accounting for
intrinsically valuable human beings, fundamental human rights, and objective moral rules.
Upon completion of their coursework, students will be equipped to do the following:
1. Clarify the nature of moral reasoning, distinguishing moral claims from mere preference
ones
2. Simplify the abortion debate, distinguishing psychological complexity from moral
complexity
3. Articulate a persuasive pro-life apologetic that competes in the marketplace of ideas
4. Summarize the intellectual arguments for and against elective abortion and embryonic
stem cell research and explain why the pro-life view on these issues is persuasive
5. Demonstrate a working knowledge of the major thinkers on both sides of the abortion
issue, including familiarity with the relevant literature
6. Understand the metaphysical foundations of the pro-life view and summarize them
clearly
7. Distinguish between endowment and performance views of human personhood and
explain why only the former can account for human equality
8. Interact with leading critics of the pro-life view and formulate responses to their views in
language lay people can understand
1

9. Answer the theological case for abortion rights in light of Scripture, philosophy, and
science
10. Explain the difference between natural rights and merely positive (legal) ones and how
confusion over each clouds clear thinking in debates over bioethics
11. Trace the intellectual history of the pro-life movement and explain the movements
strengths and weaknesses communicating key ideas

Collision Points

Required texts,
materials,
resources

Secular metaphysics cannot ground either human value or objective moral rules. Christian
theism, however, can ground both. Thus, the class will collide with secular
metaphysics.[DS1]
Books:
Scott Klusendorf, The Case for Life: Equipping Christians to Engage the Culture
(Wheaton: Crossway, 2009)
Peter Kreeft, The Unaborted Socrates: A Dramatic Debate on the Issues Surrounding
Abortion (Downers Grove: IVP, 1983)
Gregory Koukl, Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 2009)
Articles:

Class Delivery
and use of
Blackboard
PRO-LIFE APOLOGETICS

Tooley, Michael, Abortion & Infanticide, in Philosophy and Public Affairs, 2:1 (1972).
http://science.kennesaw.edu/~echen1/Bioethics/Readings%20and%20slides%20for%20
Quarter%202/readings/Tooley--Abortion%20and%20Infanticide.pdf

Peter Singer, Interview at Princeton University,

http://www.princeton.edu/~psinger/faq.html

Condic, Maureen, Life: Defining the Beginning by the End, First Things, May 2003.
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2003/05/life-defining-the-beginning-by-the-end

Thomson, Judith Jarvis, A Defense of Abortion, Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 1,
#1. http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil160,Fall02/thomson.htm

The Case Against Abortion, interview with Francis Beckwith, Ignatius, Dec. 2007.
http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features2007/beckwith_defendlife_dec07.asp

Beckwith, Francis, The Human Being, a Person of Substance: A Response to Dean

Stretton, in Persons, Moral Worth, and Embryos: A Critical Analysis of Pro-Choice
Arguments, Edited by Stephen Napier (Dordrecht: Springer, 2011), 67-83.
https://bearspace.baylor.edu/Francis_Beckwith/www/Sites/ResponseToStretton.pdf

Copan, Paul, God the Best Explanation, in Loving Wisdom: Christian Philosophy of
Religion (Atlanta: Chalice Press, 2007). http://paulcopan.com/articles/pdf/LovingWisdom_Chapter-10.pdf
The class is divided into three parts. Part one begins May 11 and consists of the reading
you will do prior to attending lectures in July. During this time, you will complete all
reading assignments and answer chapter review questions from The Case for Life. Part
2

two is the classroom lectures you will attend in July 13-17. During this time, you will
have no reading assignments. Part three begins July 27 and ends August 11. During this
time, you will finish reading assignments and write your paper.
Assignment
Policy

Reading is a requirement for completing the written assignments and participating in

classroom assignments. At the final exam, you will be asked to indicate the percentage of
reading completed for the course. Your chapter review questions and final paper will be
returned upon request.

Learning &
Evaluation
Activities

ASSIGNMENT DESCRIPTIONS:

Required readingStudents will read selected material from the required texts and
report the percentage of readings completed when they turn in final papers. Students
must complete at least 60% of the reading to pass the course. NOTE: Some reading
assignments will stretch your mind and seem difficult. Keep reading. The classroom
discussions, along with the lecture notes, will clear up those points you fail to grasp from
the reading material. Please secure hard-copy versions of the required texts, as your
margin notes and highlighting will help you retrieve material for papers and exams. (At
the same time, its crucial that you begin building a pro-life apologetics library.)

Review questions in The Case for LifeThe student will provide concise and
meticulous answers to the review questions at the end of each assigned chapter. The
answers are due at the midterm exam and the final paper. Any student failing to complete
the review questions will fail the course.[DS2]

Midterm examStudents will select two topics (out of five) based on the abortionchoice arguments were reviewing and write a 2-page (1.5-spaced) essay for each. Page 1
should concisely and accurately summarize the argument and any support offered for it.
Pages two and three should offer a concise critical analysis. In addition, there will be 20
true/false questions and 20 multiple choice questions. The exam is open book and open
notewhich means your answers should be precise. Students will have 14 days to
complete the exam and email it to the instructor. [DS3]

Final paperStudents will pick one of the following topics and write a 8 to 10-page
essay (double-spaced) complete with careful footnoting and citing of sources. Your paper
must have a strong thesis statementthat is, a one-sentence summary of the point you
will argue throughout your essay. A strong thesis statement might read like one of the
following: [DS4]
Professor Smiths claim that bodily autonomy trumps all other concerns fails in that
it ignores at least six equally important considerations.
Abortion was not a mainstream practice in 19th century America as Mohr asserts,
but was practiced primarily by women seduced out of wedlock, engaged in
prostitution, or involved in Spiritism.
While Turners argument is plausible to Americans who already support his
functionalist premise, it largely ignores counterexamples which challenge his view.

PRO-LIFE APOLOGETICS

Final Paper Topics:

1. Review the debate between David Boonin and Peter Kreeft at the link below. Who won
the exchange in terms of the arguments presented? And why should we see it that way?
Note: While you may briefly mention the speaking styles of each presenter, do not
discuss in detail. You will do that in your speech and debate class. Rather, stick to the
apologetic arguments advanced in the exchange. Make sure your paper concisely
summarizes the main thesis advanced by each speaker, along with a detailed analysis of
where he could have done better advancing his primary claims. Watch the debate here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RobCjM0ZLA
2. Read Alberto Giubilini & Francesca Minerva, Why Should the Baby Live? in the
British Medical Journal. The authors contend: (1) Both fetuses and newborns do not
have the same moral status as actual persons. (2) The fact that both are potential persons
is morally irrelevant. (3) Adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people.
Thus, the authors conclude that what we call after-birth abortion (killing a newborn)
should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is permissible, including cases
where the newborn is not disabled. Your assignment is to write a persuasive response to
this editorial. http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011100411.full.pdf+html
3. Along the lines of Peter Kreefts Unaborted Socrates and using questions based on Greg
Koukls Columbo Tactic (see Case for Life, pp. 149-156 and Koukls book Tactics),
construct an imaginary dialogue between a Liberal Professor who supports abortion and
a pro-life apologist who does not. Assume they are having a civil exchange over coffee
on topics related to the nature of right and wrong, human value, bodily rights, and the
hard cases like rape and life of the mother. The dialogue MUST accurately reflect the
views of abortion-choice defenders as well as the pro-life thinkers who engage them.
Both the questions and the responses should tease out many of the themes discussed in
your reading and lecture material. If you cant imagine creating a lively exchange that
truly engages the reader, pick a different paper topic.

MODULAR TOPIC AND ASSIGNMENTS:

[DS5]

1. What Is the Nature of Moral Reasoning?

Key points: 1) Pro-lifers dont oppose abortion because they dislike it; they oppose it
because it violates rational moral principles; 2) Neutrality is Impossible: Everyone
brings prior metaphysical assumptions to the table.
Assigned readings: Beckwith interview in Ignatius; Klusendorf, pp.13-34, 91-110.
[DS6]

2. Whats the Issue? Clarifying the Debate

PRO-LIFE APOLOGETICS

Key point: The abortion debate is not morally complex, but turns on one question that
trumps all others.
Assigned readings: Klusendorf, pp.71-88; Kreeft, pp. 12-73.
4

Assigned video: The Ethics of Abortion, Pt. 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mG6zulqxzlw&feature=youtu.be
Assigned lectures notes, Pt. 1.

3. What is the Unborn? The Pro-life Case from Science

Key point: From the earliest stages of development, the unborn are distinct, living,
and whole human beings.
Assigned readings: Klusendorf, pp.35-47; Condic, Life: Defining the Beginning by
the End.
Assigned video: The Ethics of Abortion, Pt. 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAxA2wCLDvE&feature=youtu.be

4. What Makes Humans Valuable? Pro-Life Case from Philosophy #1

Key point: There is no essential difference between the embryo you once were and
the adult you are today that justifies killing you at that earlier stage of development.
Assigned readings: Klusendorf, pp.49-69; Tooley, Abortion & Infanticide
Assigned lecture notes, Pt. 2

5. What Makes Humans Valuable? Pro-Life Case from Philosophy #2

Key point: Arguments that set aside one class of humans that can be killed from
another class that cant be are ad-hoc, arbitrary, and prove too much.
Assigned reading: Beckwith, The Human Being: A Person of Substance.
Assigned video, The Ethics of Abortion, Pt. 3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxAnN3ex5GQ&feature=youtu.be

6. Where Do We Land? Foundations of a Pro-Life Worldview

Key points: 1) The alleged silence of the biblical writers does not mean they
condoned abortion, but that prohibitions against it were largely unnecessary. 2) In a
universe that came from nothing and was caused by nothing, human beings (at any
stage of development) are cosmic accidents and objective morals are a myth.
Assigned reading: Klusendorf, pp.111-145; Copan, God the Best Explanation

7. How Do We Answer? Addressing Common Fallacies

PRO-LIFE APOLOGETICS

Key points: 1) Appeals to choice, privacy, illegal abortions, and gender fail to
address the central question in the abortion debate; 2) The appeal to bodily rights
fails to justify abortion.
Assigned readings: Thomson, A Defense of Abortion, Klusendorf, pp.157-201.
Assigned video, The Ethics of Abortion, Pt. 4
Assigned lecture notes, Pt. 3

8. How Do We Answer?, Part1: Engaging with Grace and Truth

Key point: Next time you hit a roadblock in a conversation, ask a good question.
Assigned reading: Klusendorf, pp.150-156; Kreeft, pp.75-115.

9. How Do We Answer?, Part 2: Perfecting Engagement Skills

Grading Matrix
and Evaluation

Key point: The purpose of dialogue is not to win arguments, but give critics
something to think about
Assigned reading: Koukl, Tactics; Kreeft, pp. 120-155.

GRADING PERCENTAGES:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Required reading20% (You will report the amount completed on final exam)
Review questions in Case for Life20% (due at mid-term & final exam)
Mid-term exam: short essay and multiple choice30% (mailed week 3)
Final paper30% (Due September 10)

Note: The instructor will provide notes summarizing classroom sessions. [DS7]

Assignment
Policy

Assignment Due Dates and Policy:

Grade Scale

Attendance
Policy

PRO-LIFE APOLOGETICS

Reading Assignments: A signed statement indicating the percentage of reading you

completed will be on your final exam.
Case for Life chapter questions are due at the mid-term and final exams[DS8]. No late
work accepted.
Mid-term exam is due July 13the first day of classes. Please print and hand to the
instructor. No late exams accepted.
Final Paper is due September 10 and will be emailed to the instructor in as a pdf. You
will lose points for improper citation and bad grammar. Citations should be footnoted
at the bottom of each page and follow this format used in the required text section
above. No late exams aceppted.

A = 100-93%
C = 76.9-73%
A- = 92.9-90%
C- = 72.9-70%
B+ = 89.9-87%
D+ = 69.9-67%
B = 86.9-83%
D = 66.9-63%
B- = 82.9-80%
D- = 62.9-60%
C+ = 79.9-77%
F = Below 60%
As an academic institution, Oklahoma Wesleyan University places the highest priority on
learning; therefore, attendance in all classes is critically important, and attendance will be
taken in each class session. Participation in this course must take precedence over
preparation for other valuable student activities, even over preparation for extracurricular
activities in which a student officially represents the university. When a student misses
6

class in order to officially represent the university, he or she must notify the professor in
advance; the students absence on that day will be treated as a legitimate, excused absence.
The student will not be excused from course learning expectations and/or assignments for
that day; however, he or she will not incur any grade point penalty for the absence itself.

Learning
Challenges

Academic
Honesty Policy

After three tardies 1% will be deducted from the final grade for each additional tardy.
Students with nine (9) or more (unexcused) absences will receive a grade reduction of two
grade levels (e.g., from A- to B, or B to C+). Special written appeals to this policy may be
considered (e.g., health reasons). For the student who has only one absence or less for
the semester, there will be a bonus of 3% awarded!
Any student who desires assistance with a learning or physical disability that may affect
either the students academic progress or access to academic services is required to report
these needs to the Student Academic Services so that appropriate accommodations may
be made. It is the students right and responsibility to disclose his/her disability to
instructors when and if they choose to initiate requests for accommodations.
Oklahoma Wesleyan University seeks to develop mature Christian leaders and scholars
who produce their own scholastic work and who demonstrate integrity under all
conditions. The practice of academic honesty is a high priority in our community. Failure
to meet this standard is considered a most serious offense. The Academic Honesty Policy
at OWU includes all that is described in the OWU Student Handbook 2009-2010 and the
OWU Catalog. This includes any examples of cheating on examinations, copying another
students work or plagiarism as is outlined in the catalogue. At the instructors discretion,
any instance of cheating or plagiarism will result in any or all of the following
consequences: (1) A substantial reduction of the grade for that assignment, (2) an F for
the assignment, (3) failure of the course. Additionally any act of Academic Dishonesty
will be reported to the Office of the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs and
may lead to suspension or expulsion from the university.
Included in this syllabus is an Academic Honesty form that must be signed by the student
and returned to the instructor.

Appeal Process

Right of Revision
Student Course/
Professor
Evaluations

PRO-LIFE APOLOGETICS

A student who has questions or concerns regarding any aspect of this course should first
raise their concerns with their professor. If no satisfactory resolution is reached, the
student or instructor is encouraged to communicate with the dean of the school offering
this course.
In the event of any necessary revision of this syllabus, the student will be informed well in
advance and in class in writing.
At the end of the semester, all students are encouraged to participate in the evaluation, as it
is the students opportunity to provide feedback regarding both positive and negative
aspects of the course. Please give specific, authentic, and constructive feedback that will
enhance our ability to provide classes and programs that are academically strong and
relevant.

Academic Honesty Policy Statement

Oklahoma Wesleyan University seeks to develop mature Christian leaders and scholars
who produce their own scholastic work and who demonstrate integrity under all
conditions. The practice of academic honesty is a high priority in our community. Failure
to meet this standard is considered a most serious offense. The Academic Honesty Policy at
OWU includes all that is described in the OWU Student Handbook 2009-2010 and the
OWU Catalogue. This includes any examples of cheating on examinations, copying
another students work or plagiarism as is outlined in the catalogue. At the instructors
discretion, any instance of cheating or plagiarism will result in any or all of the following
consequences: (1) A substantial reduction of the grade for that assignment, (2) an F for
the assignment, (3) failure of the course. Additionally any act of Academic Dishonesty will
be reported to the Office of the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs and may
lead to suspension or expulsion from the university.
I ______________________ have read and understand the academic honesty statement in this
syllabus. I acknowledge that further clarification of the policy can be found in the OWU
Academic Catalogue. By signing this policy I accept my responsibility to conduct all my
academic activities according to this policy. I also acknowledge that any failure to adhere to the
OWU Academic Policy will result in the penalties outlined above.

__________________________
Signature

__________________________
Date

PRO-LIFE APOLOGETICS

PRO-LIFE APOLOGETICS