The anti-human rights propagandists often try to spin opposition to their agenda as "religious" viewpoints, and demean the religion, or they invoke a misinterpretation of the concept of state and religious separation to dismiss the expression of the viewpoint as not permitted.
They use the ad hominem argument and present the church's involvement as a red herring so the discussion moves away from the fundamental "killing vs. not-killing" debate to a dismissal asserting falsely that "a [discredited] church" shouldn't interfere here.
The fact is that the violent, anti-human rights crimes being perpetrated are obvious to all who honestly look at it. By resorting to logical fallacy, the anti-human rights extremists are attempting to divert attention away from the fact they support, encourage, and participate in the killing of defenceless, innocent citizens. Their defense consists of arguing about the credentials of people that call for such an obvious violation of basic human rights to be stopped.
Misleading rhetoric is a weak shield. Everyone, religious or otherwise, knows what killing and human rights violations look like.
"10. From 8 and 9, we deduce that abortion is a grave injustice."