Nathan Apodaca

Pro-life advocates and racial justice advocates are striving for the exact same thing: a society in which all human beings are treated as equals, respected and protected in law and in culture.

The humanity of the preborn, and the inhumanity of abortion, will become much more clear to us when we realize that we ourselves, and the people we love the most, were also preborn human beings at one point in their lives.

Being a leader means you exemplify moral virtues to the utmost of your ability for the benefit of those you serve, not shirk away from those virtues to gain friends, especially when lives are at stake; and Shenck claims to believe the preborn count as one of us.

Over the past several years an odd new wave of criticism is being leveled at the pro-life movement. Is it warranted?

However, when pro-life advocates are able to answer even the toughest or vilest challenges with grace and clarity, those who are “on the fence” regarding abortion are left with something to think about.

Abortion is often framed as a form of compassion, preventing children from ever experiencing bullying, discrimination, poverty, or others forms of suffering. This line of thinking only makes sense if one starts with the presumption that the preborn are not fully human as the born are.

Does the Bible's description of God breathing life into Adam mean we cannot be sure when human life begins, like Pete Buttigieg says?

War films like 1917 have a habit of confronting our moral complacency and our cynical apathy by bringing to light the character traits which make or break great men and women in promoting good or tolerating evil.

A forthcoming film for the Sundance Film Festival is hoping to spur dialogue on abortion among filmmakers and viewers. Titled Never Rarely Sometimes Always, the movie follows two teenage girls who are pregnant and seeking abortion.

This study is not the most helpful tool for determining the true motivations for pro-lifers. However, for the sake of argument, let’s suppose it’s true: pro-lifers (including the women in the movement) are all evil, nasty, misogynistic jerks. So what?

The “Right to Refuse” argument is by far one of the strongest arguments for abortion rights. If one wanted to ground abortion as a natural right of women this is a good place to start. I happen to think it is one of the best arguments put forward in favor of abortion.

Bodily autonomy: This is probably the best argument for the basis of abortion rights, and poses a serious challenge for the pro-life advocate.

It has become fashionable in recent times for abortion choice advocates to make a series of accusations, assertions, and quasi-arguments in response to pro-life efforts in order to dismiss pro-life claims about the immorality of abortion.

The pro-abortion movement incessently claims that pro-lifers only care about babies before they’re born. Lies? We think so.

Rep. Rogers angrily denounced the pro-life movement with one of the most shockingly honest admissions by a pro-abortion advocate. Here is where he missed the mark.

The objections from pro-choice critics of the March for Life simply fail to give a good reason to reject the pro-life position as “unscientific” and immoral.

Attempting to normalize abortion in American society, the new Kids Meet video actually does a better job of normalizing bad arguments for abortion.

How should a civil society treat human beings who do not measure up to our culture’s standard of who is valuable?

A recent article by Presbyterian Pastor Tim Keller calling for an openness to both American political parties by American Christians has gained a lot of attention. Here's where it misses the mark.

Are Christians hyprocrites by standing for the preborn but ignoring other social issues?

A timely new book by Laura Hughes brings hope to a culture currently filled with despair and hatred.