ABSTRACT
Arguments that claim opponents of abortion are inconsistent in their actions or beliefs are increasingly prevalent. Here, we survey the most common of these arguments and describe their common structure. This enables us to analyze the many responses by reference to some standard types of objections. While they have been useful in forcing opponents of abortion to articulate their views more clearly and understand their implications, we conclude that it is surprisingly difficult to construct successful inconsistency arguments. Further, we argue that even if they succeed, such arguments are inconsequential. Finally, we note that critics fail to provide convincing empirical evidence that opponents of abortion act inconsistently in the ways that critics describe.
