Have you ever felt at a loss for words on how to confront a pro-choice abortion advocate? If so you are not alone. Pro-choice proponents by and large have the law on their side and can be quite militant when confronted on the issue of abortion. But there is good news. The next time you confront someone who wants to defend their pro-abortion stand you can arm yourself for battle with one of the most powerful weapons around. This simple weapon is called “The Columbo Tactic.”
Noted apologist Gregory P. Koukl, a master at helping Christian’s defend their faith as well as helping us take a pro-Christian stand on many controversial issues, has developed a host of different tactics that can put us on the offensive instead of cowering in a corner when confronted with a hot button issue. In today’s devotion I would like to focus on perhaps his most powerful tactic – The Columbo Tactic.
This tactic gets its name from the old television detective series called Columbo. In the show detective Columbo is always seen trying to catch the murderer by asking all kinds of questions. These questions sometimes seem strange but as with all good detectives there is a method to his madness. And therein lies the simplicity of the Columbo tactic. We just need to ask a few simple questions to take the offensive, dismantle the other person’s arguments and shift the burden of proof to the other person who must explain their position. Koukl lists three simple questions that we can use to help the pro-choice camp hopefully reconsider their position. Those three questions are “What do you mean by that?” “How did you come to that conclusion?” and “Have you ever considered…?”1
Let’s take a few of the most popular pro-choice arguments and see how we can apply the Columbo tactic to help us at least plant some seeds of doubt in our opponents.
Many people say they are personally against abortion but they support a woman’s right to choose if they want to get an abortion. A simple question to ask is how did you come to that conclusion? This will help us get to the reason the person holds this view. Many will answer that they are against abortion because it is taking an innocent life. If they give you this answer you can then ask them if they have ever considered that they are in effect condoning another individual’s decision to take an innocent life. Hopefully they will see this and perhaps see a glaring inconsistency in their stance.
Another argument says that during the first trimester the growing organism in the womb is just a wad of tissue. Since many people are not familiar with the scientific evidence of what is happening during the first three months of a pregnancy a fair question to ask is what do you mean by a wad of tissue? Most people who take this position will probably not be able to give a good answer since all they have done is mimic the stance of Planned Parenthood. This is a perfect time to ask them if they have ever considered the scientific evidence surrounding what is going on in the womb during those first three months. Now we can share that the tiny heart has begun beating at three weeks, brain waves are identical to those of an adult at seven weeks and that by the end of the first trimester all ten fingers and ten toes are present. Not exactly a wad of tissue. Hopefully this will give our friend a lot to think about.
Personhood is another area that a pro-choice advocate will argue against. They may concede that the unborn is a human being but they won’t acknowledge that it is a person. The obvious question is what do you mean by that or to make the question even more thought provoking we might ask what’s the difference between a human being and a human person? Depending on how they answer the question we can use the acronym SLED to ask them to consider why they believe the unborn is not a person. SLED stands for (S) size, (L) level of development, (E) environment, and (D) degree of dependency.2
For example, should size be a determining factor in deciding on personhood? While the unborn is indeed tiny so is a newborn in comparison to an adult. Should we therefore conclude that it is OK to terminate the life of the newborn since it is so tiny? Of course not. And while we will concede that the unborn is totally dependent on its mother for survival isn’t a newborn also totally dependent on its parents for survival? At the very least this line of questioning and dialogue can help show our pro-abortion friend that his logic is flawed.
One final very thought provoking question could be: Can you picture a woman seeking counsel from Jesus Christ on what to do with an unwanted pregnancy? Or to frame the question in a slightly different way: Can you picture Jesus Christ, the personification of gentleness, compassion and love, telling that woman that abortion would be the best course of action under her circumstances? While many may deny that Jesus is God I believe most people know what Jesus stands for and would have a very hard time believing that Jesus would condone an abortion. And if you really want to leave our pro-choice friend with something to think about you might want to share the following scenario:
And now just imagine Jesus Christ accompanying this frightened and confused woman, now twenty weeks along, to the abortion chamber? And finally, can you picture Jesus Christ standing by her side, gently holding her hand, and telling her everything will be OK, while the abortionist begins to tear away the baby’s tiny arms and legs from its body and then proceeds to crush the baby’s skull before he removes it from the womb and tosses it into a garbage pail?3
As you can now see by using the Koukl Columbo tactic and sharing questions with our pro-choice friend this gives him the chance to think about his reasons for being pro-choice and consider the pro-life viewpoint in a way he may never have thought about before. And by the way don’t forget to pray before you enter into enemy territory. We need wisdom when asking questions and the Holy Spirit should be our partner whenever we go into battle.
1 Gregory P. Koukl, Successful Tactics in the Defense of the Faith, Christian Apologetics – Biola University
2 Why Abortion Is Unjust Discrimination, Stand to Reason website. 2015. http://www.str.org/articles/why-abortion-is-unjust-discrimination#.VjSNKDZdFfx
3 Curt Blattman, Children of the Womb. (Bloomington, IN: 1stBooks Library, 2003), 168-169.
When talking about the apologetic “battle” and the need to “arm” ourselves with “one of the most powerful weapons around,” the Bible provides the only powerful method we are to use to defend the faith.
More than a “tactic” it is the command of apologetic method based on the authority of God’s Word. It’s found in Proverbs 26:4-5 where we read:
4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
or you yourself will be just like him.
5 Answer a fool according to his folly,
or he will be wise in his own eyes.
The nature of battle is more than just planting “the seeds of doubt.” Weapons are not sharpened just to show the enemy his “inconsistencies.” We are in it to win it, which means we want our opponent to lay down his weapons, repent and bow the knee to declare that Jesus is Lord.
So, what do these seemingly contradictory verses mean?
A fool, in the Bible, has a very specific description. Psalm 14:1 says, “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.” And Proverbs 18:2 says, “A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself.”
So, our verses in Proverbs 26 give us a clear understanding of how we ought to answer such a person. First, we should not answer the fool–in what way?–according to his folly. That is, the very thing that makes him a fool–his disbelief in God and disregard for Truth–are not to become the basis for our answer. Why? Lest we be like him!
However, the next verse, a seeming contradiction, tells us to go ahead and answer according to his folly. In other words, to use their argumentation as the basis for our response. But this time, we are going to approach it differently. We are going to expose this folly to him, “lest he be wise in his own conceit.” Meaning, we are going to follow his worldview to its obvious conclusion.
To do battle by asking questions where the unbeliever is assumed to have the authority to evaluate (judge) God’s truth Is to put the wrong person on the stand. God alone is judge and the evidence will make no sense until looked at through His eyes, the Bible. This goes way beyond Columbo and his clever approach meant to trick the guilty person into a confession.
As Peter admonished us to always be ready to give an answer when asked, we must first sanctify Christ as Lord in our heart. “For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds.”