Bill Nye Part I: Telling Women What to Do

Bill Nye “The Science Guy” recently made a short video mocking people who disagree with him on the murder of innocent babies. Bill Nye did a surprisingly poor job in this video. Although the pro-murder position is indefensible, naturally, some do it better than others. 

Many Facebook avatars without a scientific reputation have defended the indefensible with much more honesty, consistency, and skill than Bill Nye’s abortion blunder. He uses the same arguments as many on his side, but adds a new combination of misrepresentations and arguments never heard before. 

There is a subtle fallacy that lies gently over this video before one word is even spoken, the Argument from Authority. Bill Nye carries extra authority to many because he is, well, the science guy. When he begins to call anti-murder proponents “scientifically ignorant”and explains the process of fertilization, it carries more weight because, as a scientist, he is the expert after all. Apparently all one needs to do is add the word “science” to their nickname and start a children’s television show that requires a lab-coat to be an objective authority on all issues under the sun. 

Bill Nye received his degree from Cornell in mechanical engineering. He went on to work for Boeing and later worked for an aeronautics company. He is not an authority on biology. Bill’s voice carries no extra weight, but it is that assumption that made this go viral. 
(This is not to suggest that Nye is not right because he is an engineer, nor is it to say that he can not be right unless he is a biologist. It is also not to suggest he said something scientifically wrong, or even to suggest that he knows nothing about science. He is, however, outside of his field of expertise on this issue.) 

Bill Nye is the Miley Cyrus of mechanical engineering science. He has been associated so long with children’s entertainment, that a man with the intense, serious degree that he has (I don’t mean that sarcastically; mechanical engineering is no joke) is now playing catch-up so to speak. He is on a public tirade to capture respect (much of which he deserves). And apparently that comes through debating evolution against a Christian, profanity and sarcasm, mocking creationism, and through defending abortion. In other words, offending Christians is one of the best ways to make a positive public name for yourself in 2015 America.

The video quickly moves on from one fallacy to another before one single word is spoken. Not only is the veil of Arguing from Authority lightly draped over the post, but the title itself refutes the very thesis. 

“When can we stop telling women what to do with their bodies?” is the title of the video. The question is obviously rhetorical; it could be read “We need to stop telling women what they can do with their bodies.” Notice that this video is public. This means women have watched it. Bill Nye has just told women what they can and can’t do. Thus, those crazy pro-life preachers have no authority over women because Bill Nye says so. Bill Nye gives permission to his female subjects to take marching orders from no one….else. To answer the rhetoric, perhaps before Nye broke the rule? 

It isn’t the first time this fallacy happens. Nye later says, “I would really encourage you to not tell women what to do”, which is telling women what to do. If a woman wanted to murder someone who is older than 9 months, Nye would have no problem telling her what to do. 

It happens a third time when Nye says “Nobody likes abortion, but you can’t tell somebody what to do”. You can’t tell someone what to do, unless your Bill Nye, then you can tell the whole world what they can and can’t do. 

However, why does no one like abortion? If it’s not the murder of a person why wouldn’t it be liked? That very claim is damning: it exposes his entire position. It’s pro-murder and he knows it. He just said so.

Nye can make amends by removing the video and apologizing for his misogyny.  If a woman wanted to use her fingers to write an anti-abortion blog, or use her voice to protest abortion, does she have the rights over her body to do that? Or is that woman not allowed to do with her body what she wants because the women she is protesting have a right to have no one tell them what to do with their bodies? 

Notice the other inconsistency: no other crime requires a specific gender in order to judge. 

This is especially convenient given the very genders that are not allowed to have an opinion on abortion are forced to pay for it. Planned Parenthood is federally funded. More than half of their federal income comes from the very people who are expelled from discussing what they do. That’s similar to telling black people they can’t vote, but forcing them to pay for, build, and run the election booths. 

I have the right to speak on a woman’s immoral choice to murder her baby for 3 reasons, the latter being the most important: 

1) I pay for them.

 My money my decisions. 

2) I am a former baby.

 During an abortion a baby is murdered. I once was a baby and I was fortunate enough to not be ripped apart and sold. Therefore, I would like to speak on behalf of all babies, being that I was one, and say ripping our heads off is immoral. 

3) Matthew 28

 Jesus has all authority. His Law trumps all Law. His commands trump man’s (Acts 5). Therefore, it is my authority as a disciple of Jesus and son of the Most High God, the Maker of all things, including a woman’s body and her baby, to proclaim His law and condemn what He condemns. 

My God trumps your reproductive organs. 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s