Culture Wars
By Paul Gianoli 

I knew some people didn’t believe in intrinsic human rights, and we hear about moral relativism all the time, but as I sat in a graduate faculty house at McGill University in Montreal I couldn’t believe my ears.

“No, we can’t know that what Hitler did in Nazi Germany was objectively wrong,” one of the graduate students clarified.  

“Well, what if all 18 of us were stranded on a deserted island?  Can we agree that it would be objectively wrong to kill some of us?” another student asked.

“If it meant some of us could continue to live, or escape the island, we would be justified in killing others—survival of the fittest, you know,” was the response.

I hadn’t been planning to speak to a graduate-student moral-philosophy discussion group when I began my trip to Kingston, Ottawa, and Montreal.  I had met with students at the University of Ottawa (Ottawa Youth for Life) and Queen’s University (Queen’s Alive) for pro-life 101 apologetics workshops.  But those were different.

My trip had also brought me to Montreal for the National Pro-Life Conference, Nov 17-19.  The opposition we were faced with at this event, the resulting solidarity among those present, and the inspiration of great speakers all played a role in me becoming more “militant” in my pro-life stance.

At the completion of the conference—while protestors chanted at the conference attendees—I slipped out to head down to McGill University where I was trying to meet with a couple of student contacts.  And this is where I met the graduate student who invited me to his discussion group.

I knew they would be a tougher audience than anything I’d officially spoken at.  I also knew they would need a more philosophical approach to the abortion debate.

General agreement that unborn and born humans have the same essence came quickly.  For awhile, we dwelt on the separation of human being from personhood—and what defines personhood. 

But after three hours of debate, it became apparent that our differences came down to disagreement on two fundamental questions: 1) Why can’t we kill persons if circumstances justify it?  2) Can we really know objective right and wrong?

I had always hoped that pro-life opponents just hadn’t thought the issue through.  But I’m realizing that’s not the case.  Academics on the other side have a whole intellectual paradigm taken from modernist thinkers.  It may be illogical to us, but it “holds water” in their mind.

We have a worldview and a vision of the world we fight for.  They have a drastically different worldview and vision of the world they fight for.  There is one important difference: we can live everyday life according to ours.

I’ve often been asked by pro-life students with whom I work: “if this is so logical, why don’t people accept it?”  Good question.  Now I know why.

Paul Gianoli is the 2005-2006 Executive Director of National Campus Life Network.  NCLN is a pro-life organization by students, for students.