More Wills

I've written previously about Garry Wills on religion and abortion. He seemed to me to be using a bait and switch argument; he was saying that since abortion wasn't technically a "religious" question to Christians (I'm not even sure if I'd grant him that), then they all can choose whatever belief on the issue they want and still remain members in good standing in their church. At the very least, this is for the church to decide, not Wills.

The LA Times just had a piece adapted from his latest book, expanding on his views. Oddly, I'd say it detracts from his shorter argument since some of the stuff it adds are about how we can't respect all life or we couldn't eat vegetables, that we can't protect all human life or we couldn't cut hair, that we don't defend all human life or potential human life since we don't protect all semen or ova.

Even if he's merely doing this to center his argument, I'm not sure why he bothers. These are not arguments that anyone takes seriously (as he knows) and, as far as I can see, not arguments that strengthen his conclusion.