John,

I have encountered many arguments in favor of abortion over the years, but my sold-out debate this past week reminded me just how bleak certain worldviews can become when followed to their logical conclusions.

I was at the University of California, Irvine, debating Destiny — a live streamer and political commentator — on the question of whether abortion should be legal.

We have debated before, and he previously argued that human consciousness was the decisive factor in determining the cutoff for legal abortion, placing that threshold at roughly 16–20 weeks of gestation.

 
The other night, however, he abandoned that position and instead defended the legality of abortion at any point up until birth.

You can watch the debate here: liveaction.org/videos/lila-rose-and-destiny-clash-on-abortion-at-uc-irvine-full-debate

Destiny’s reasoning rested on parsing human value into compartmentalized traits: a preborn child’s lack of memory, for instance, was presented as sufficient justification to end his or her life.

Yet his central argument for permitting abortion through all nine months ultimately came down to one claim: that no mother should be compelled to use her body to sustain the life of her child.

In his view, a woman should not be required to nourish or physically support a dependent human being, even if that dependency is a natural consequence of pregnancy.

I responded by asking whether parents likewise have no obligation to use their bodies to feed, protect, and shelter their children after birth.

Our legal system already recognizes that they do. Parental neglect carries serious consequences precisely because mothers and fathers are expected to meet their children’s basic needs.

Whether breastfeeding an infant, carrying a toddler who cannot yet walk, or working long hours to provide a safe home, parents routinely — and rightly — use their bodies in service to their children’s well-being.

When they cannot fulfill this responsibility, they are required to place the child in the care of someone who can. They may not simply abandon a born child to die.

This is a just standard for newborns, and it should also apply to children in the womb, who possess the same inherent right to life.

Conversations like these are not easy, but they remain essential. We must continue engaging those who disagree with us. If we speak the truth consistently — boldly yet with compassion — people will hear it. And lives will be saved.

You can do this right now, John, by watching, sharing, and commenting on this debate video. Together, we can share the truth with love that counters the self-focused, pro-death worldview on which the abortion industry is built.

I’ll be debating another opponent this Thursday at Vanguard University. Please pray for me and pray for hearts and minds to be changed.

Innocent lives depend on our willingness to speak.

For Life,

Lila Rose
Founder and President