Shining a light to illuminate the truth and standing strong for the right to life

By Laura Echevarria, Director of Communications and NRL Press Secretary 

One of my favorite movie, television, and book genres is classic mysteries. I enjoy the hunt for clues and putting them together like a puzzle to solve the crime.

My favorites include “The Thin Man” movies based on the Dashiell Hammett books, books by Agatha Christie, Dorothy L. Sayers, G.K. Chesterton, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle—these classic writers of classic mysteries were well educated in history, grammar, debate, language, philosophy, and logic.

Growing up with an interest in debate and logic naturally led to my joining the debate team in college where the focus was on argumentation—in its truest sense.

An argument, in its simplest form, consists of at least three parts according the late British philosopher Stephen Toulmin. His summary of an argument consisted of the claim, data, and warrant. The claim or assertion had to have data to back it up and the warrant was the connection—either implied or explicit—between the claim and the data.

Today, those basic elements are lacking in most arguments. But this is not true for the pro-life movement’s arguments for the right to life. We assert that an unborn baby is alive, a member of the human family, and, as such, is deserving of legal protection. 

Our claim is grounded in logic, science, and facts. As such, the warrant—or connection—between the science data and a baby’s life is clear.

Sadly, as we move further away from the classical educations where logic was grounded in the facts and fallacies were rejected, we are now facing a system where logic is rejected. How someone “feels” is supersedes everything else. 

From “Shout Your Abortion” campaigns by pro-abortion ideologues to movies and television shows that seem to make a character’s abortion the moral equivalent of getting a tattoo, pro-abortion arguments stumble over logic, ignore science, and treat facts as if they are irrelevant.  

The NRL Communications Department sees this constantly when working with the media. At many media outlets, there is a deeply embedded assumption that the pro-abortion side is accurate and contemporary while the pro-life side is wrongheaded and out of date. 

As bad as that is, there are also the arguments—even among the mainstream media—that pro-abortion ideology is “on the right side of history” and that the pro-life movement is a modern invention of the conservative movement.

These arguments fail the straight face test, yet they are promulgated by pro-abortion groups and too many members of the media repeatedly.

But the facts are the opposite. For much of history, there was a consensus that abortion and infanticide were indefensible.

The right to life is based in both science and historical reality. Moreover, many of the world’s faiths recognize the living child in her mother’s womb as nothing short of sacred.

Whether interacting with the media, the public, or state and federal elected officials, the pro-life movement unapologetically promotes the right to life and stands in the gap to prevent pro-abortion policies from gaining ground.

As we begin 2021, we face many challenges but the one thing we are not lacking in is the truth. Truth is—and always has been—on our side. 

As we move forward, we will do what we have always done in the face of the opposition: shine a light to illuminate the truth and stand strong for the right to life.