Is NPR possibly distorting his message? I guess I should read his book.
On the assumption that NPR has accur4ately quoted him, I would have some questions:
(1) Abortion should be the decision of an individual and "his or her" conscience... wait! Is he saying a man should be able to veto an abortion, if he's the father? Or is he saying a man should be able to mandate his partner's abortion, if he wants the baby dead? Or is he saying it's "his or her" conscience if transwomen or he/shes or whatever are getting pregnant? Or... what the hallelujah is he talking about?
(2) An intriguing concept, the individual having life-or-death power. He clearly opposes the killing of professional abortionists (I do as well). But how can you oppose that, if killing is a decision of "an individual and his or her conscience"?
It would be interesting for Schenck to meet with somebody who has actually made this "conscientious" decision to shoot an abortionist. For instance, visit James Kopp, a "conscience"-inspired idealist still in jail in NY state, and see if he's still OK with shooting Dr. Bernard Slepian through the heart.
So much for "individual decision." Your thoughts?
My thoughts are that an individual’s conscience does not matter one whit when it comes to the the murder of another human being. The primary concern is for the unborn child.
When Person A (i.e. unborn child) is incapable of making a life or death decision for themselves, then it is nice to have someone, Person B, who can be trusted to make decisions IN THE BEST INTEREST of Person A. When, in “good conscience”, Person B elects for the slaughter of Person A, because it is in the “best interest of Person B”, then Person B clearly cannot be trusted to make any decisions regarding the welfare of Person A.