Mary said:
I think the rape argument is often used by a lot of pro-choicers who haven't thought about their position that much. I think it is the classic "grenade." Did you see that flame warrior’s guide I sent? I thought it was pretty funny. It describes a grenade in Internet discourse as, "instantly reduces any semblance of reasonable discourse to smoking rubble."

I think even without the rape argument that many pro-lifers often base their arguments among faulty logic, and which are really pitfalls in debates. Many of them you point out on your show, and I've got a list of 10 or so:

1) Tying the value of a fetus to its functionality. ("It has a beating heart")
2) Tying the value of a fetus to its potential functionality ("It could grow up to be Mozart")
3) Tying the value of a fetus to the mother's actions. ("If she didn't want a baby she shouldn't have had sex", or the worst "abortion should be illegal except in cases of rape or incest")
4) Using religious arguments ("The Bible says abortion is wrong")
5) The "Abortion is Bad for Women" argument. The huge problem with this argument is that a pro-choicer can prove that having a baby in high school can be very horrible for the woman. But the other problem is more subtle. Once a pro-lifer stops talking about the fetus and starts talking about the woman, it's very easy for him to move to pro-choice territory without even knowing it. Consider the claim by some pro-lifers that there is an abortion and breast cancer link. Suppose there is. So what? Women can make their own decisions about cigarettes and eating unhealthy.
6) The "Abortion is Bad for the Country" argument In this argument, pro-lifers attempt to argue that we are having a social security crisis because there aren't enough babies because they have been killed in abortions.

My response:
Hehe. Yeah I liked that. I’m okay if the rape thing is brought up as an honest argument, perhaps an effort by the pro-choicer to find common ground with the pro-lifer, since some pro-lifers are okay with rape abortions. What I don’t like is if it’s just thrown out as a trump card or grenade. I’ve seen both. Similarly, if a pro-lifer is throwing around partial-birth abortion as a grenade, I think that’s equally lame, but if it’s meant as a stepping stone to finding common ground, since many pro-choicers agree that at least that one procedure is immoral, that’s a good thing.

I agree, there are a lot of common logical pitfalls pro-lifers make. My goal in pointing them out on the podcast is to raise the bar on critical thinking for both sides, to help us move the dialogue further, like you and I are having right now.

1) Tying the value of a fetus to its functionality. ("It has a beating heart") Yup. That’s a common mistake. I’ll concede to Liz that it can be a common ground finding point, (one poll a while back had 60+% supporting a “heartbeat bill” that banned abortion for non-life-threatening situations once the fetuses heart started beating,) but if the pro-lifer is not careful, it’s very easy to fall into that trap of tying value to the beating heart.

2) Tying the value of a fetus to its potential functionality ("It could grow up to be Mozart") Lol. Don’t even get me going on that one. We discussed that in Episode 22, "Lousy Philosophic Arguments AGAINST Abortion," Episode 63, "Responding to Pro-Life Lies," among others.

3) Tying the value of a fetus to the mother's actions. ("If she didn't want a baby she shouldn't have had sex", or the worst "abortion should be illegal except in cases of rape or incest") Yup. I can see your point. I think it’s fair to question the wisdom of having unprotected sex if the possibility of having a baby is so horrifying that abortion is the likeliest answer though…what do you think? That’s not necessarily tying the worth of the fetus to the mother’s action, is it?

4) Using religious arguments ("The Bible says abortion is wrong") Yeah, I typically only bring religion into the mix if the other person asks about it, OR if the person asks the question, “why do humans have value,” or “why are humans more valuable than animals.” I think in the end the best, most thoughtful answers will have religion tied into them, but I would also suggest the other person has some metaphysical beliefs that help form the foundation of their views as well. (with a few exceptions.)

5) The "Abortion is Bad for Women" argument. Man, I hate this one. It’s that double-edged sword again. Yeah, I think there’s some pretty strong evidence that there is some kind of link, but a lot of people grasp onto that and it’s all they talk about! You’re exactly right, that even if it is proven, it shouldn’t prohibit abortions because women can take cigarettes, etc.

6) The "Abortion is Bad for the Country" argument. Yeah, I pretty much have the same thing to say on this one. I haven’t studied this one enough to see evidence that there isn’t some kind of negative effect on social security when you wipe out 25% of a generation, but once again, it’s focusing on the wrong thing. (The opposite example would be that study someone did trying to show that abortion reduces crime since a lot of women having abortions live in high crime-risk neighborhoods. Even if that were true, it wouldn’t prove abortion is moral.)

Where’s the other 4? You can’t let me off that easy! :P