In this Impact Report, we feature highlights from Justice For All (JFA) events that took place from March to September. Each highlighted event illustrates the way smaller training teams can help us make a bigger impact. We’ve found that empowering our trainers to do events on their own helps our team to be nimble and ready to meet the great need all over the country for good dialogue training—training that includes outreach whenever possible.
This month we report on a different kind of impact that God has created through JFA, specifically through the work of our office manager, Eva Heath. This is the story of the impact God produces through human beings many have written off because of their circumstances or disabilities. It’s also the story of one woman’s testimony that even if we can’t see the good that God is bringing from difficulties right now, we must hope in Him, loving every human being precisely because each person is made in the image of God. We bid a fond farewell to you this month, Eva, and we trust God will care for you in the new chapter of your retirement!
Pro-life laws have recently been blamed for the death of Amber Thurman. Our friends at the Equal Rights Institute wrote two helpful articles responding to the pro-choice dishonesty that is in much of the media regarding this story and others like them. We encourage you to read both of them and share them!
No, Georgia’s Abortion Law Did Not Cause Amber Thurman’s Death
Outreach at Adams State University in Colorado, April 2024
When our team went to Adams State University last spring, we had the opportunity to partner with two amazing local Christian ministries on campus. On the second day of outreach, Kalen, one of the ministry leaders, and I had a providential interaction with a student. “Thomas” was walking by our exhibit, and this is how our conversation went.
Andrea: Hi, do you have time to share your thoughts on the issue of abortion?
Thomas: Yeah, I am not completely sure what my thoughts are on this issue.
Andrea: That is totally fine. Do you think abortion should be legal for all nine months of pregnancy or just for a certain period of time?
Thomas: I am not sure.
Kalen showed him images of the unborn at different developmental stages (shown right).
Thomas: Okay, I would say abortion should be legal somewhere until four to twelve weeks of pregnancy.
Andrea: Do you think abortion should be legal for all circumstances or just certain circumstances?
Thomas: I think abortion should be legal for circumstances like rape. I have a friend who was raped, got pregnant, and had an abortion. My sister was raped as well.
Andrea: That is awful. I am so sorry. That must have been so difficult on your friend and sister.
After spending time acknowledging how terrible rape is, I paused for a second. I was trying to decide where to take the conversation next.
Kalen opened the brochure again to the images of the unborn at different stages of development.
Kalen: Did you say you think abortion should be legal until this time frame (pointing to about four to twelve weeks)?
Thomas: Yes.
Andrea: When do you think life begins scientifically speaking?
Thomas: I would say around four to twelve weeks.
Kalen and I were able to discuss the biology in depth and explain how we can determine that life starts at conception.
Kalen: If the unborn is growing, it must be alive. If it has human parents, it must be human. And living humans, or human beings like you and me, are valuable, aren’t they? *
Thomas: Yes, that makes sense.
With Thomas’s permission, Kalen showed him images of a first trimester abortion. I could tell that Thomas was greatly affected as he looked at the reality of abortion. Kalen did a beautiful job explaining how many women think abortion should be legal because they mistakenly believe it empowers them.
At one point Thomas said, “Thank you for having this conversation with me. This has really opened my eyes on this issue.”
Kalen took a minute to explain that he is with Christian Challenge, a Christian club on campus. This gave us an open door to ask Thomas about his spiritual background.
Thomas didn’t have much of a spiritual background, but Kalen had the opportunity to share the gospel in great detail with him. As the conversation progressed, it was incredible to watch him begin to realize his need for a Savior.
““I appreciate you having
this conversation with
me. No one has ever
talked to me about these
things before”
Before Thomas left, he said, “I appreciate you having this conversation with me. No one has ever talked to me about these things before.”
As I reflect on this conversation, it is a reminder that God is still at work. Exodus 4:12 says, “Now therefore, go, and I will be with your mouth and teach you what you shall say.” In interactions like the one I had with Thomas, it can be challenging to know how to steer the conversation. It’s comforting to rest in the fact that God calls us to be willing, obedient, and sensitive to the Holy Spirit’s leading. He does the rest.
Thank you so much for your prayers and support that make these conversations possible. Our team is gearingup for another semester of engaging students on universities and training pro-life advocates to engage others onthe issue of abortion. I would appreciate your continued prayers.
* Kalen used the Ten Second pro-life apologist developed by Steve Wagner.
The controversial and sometimes personal nature of the abortion issue understandably makes it a topic that many people avoid discussing. Even though Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022, the number of abortions in the United States has been increasing for the last couple years to around one million annually, according to the latest reports. The need for continued civil engagement with our fellow citizens is paramount.
We rub shoulders every day with people who believe preborn children are different from us and therefore can be killed in the womb. Their deaths are shrugged off as a “woman’s choice” and we are told to believe that abortion is “healthcare.”
One reason the injustice of abortion is incredibly difficult to combat is because we don’t have to physically see the dead bodies of these preborn children in our day-to-day lives. Their deaths are hidden from public view and their dead bodies discarded under the cover of “medical waste.” Whenever we do see images of the aftermath of abortion, we quickly push the images out of our minds or we criticize those who have the boldness to show abortion for what it is. When bad ideas and worldviews are not challenged and corrected vigorously and regularly by people, they lead to humans being dehumanized and killed.
Conversations are an important place where minds begin to change. They are the place where citizens exchange ideas, and those ideas make their way into legislatures. Our world becomes a safer place for the vulnerable when human beings are valued from their conception. For some, starting a conversation about the preborn and abortion may seem terrifying, while for others, maybe it’s not challenging at all. Maybe for others it’s something in the middle. Regardless of where you find yourself in this mix, here are some tips I have learned from my own experiences that can make your conversations productive.
One of the reasons good conversations about abortion and other controversial issues are rare is because many people don’t take time to carefully listen to others. It is easy to enter discussions in debate mode ready to counter any incorrect idea the other person shares. When both people go in with their defenses up, each person plans what their next response will be instead of trying to understand what the person is saying and why she is saying it. People don’t respond well when it feels like a constant game of who can one-up the other person with a response that will show her how “dumb” or how “wrong” she is.
If we take the time to sit down with someone else, side by side, and hear her story and her reasons for the beliefs she holds, we will have a better chance of making a more persuasive case for our beliefs when that time comes. We shouldn’t merely listen well though just because it can open up better opportunities to change her mind in the future. We should take the time to listen well to others because it shows the other person you see her, that what she is saying matters, and what she experiences matters. It shows her we care about her life.
Asking good questions is also a crucial part of good conversations. Good dialogue will not happen unless you understand where this person is coming from. Asking questions shows we want to understand the other person better and shows we are being attentive and sensitive to important details about her background and beliefs. Here are some of the questions I find really helpful to ask in my own conversations:
What makes this issue important to you?
What do you think about abortion?
Where do you find yourself in the abortion debate?
What do you mean when you say pro-choice or pro-life?
How did you come to be pro-choice or pro-life?
Do you think abortion should be legal for all nine months of pregnancy or only a portion of that time?
How have conversations about abortion gone for you in the past?
Have you always had this view or has it changed for you over time? If it’s changed, how did that change of view happen?
Do you know anyone that has had an abortion?
Despite our many differences, human beings have a lot in common. Finding common ground means taking the time to highlight agreement, and it creates a better place to discuss difficult things. Human beings by nature deeply desire community and love. We want to be respected, accepted, listened to, and protected.
When we talk to a pro-choice person, the stakes for her changing her mind are high. She has to come to terms with the fact that she has been supporting the killing of innocent children in the womb. Maybe she has to face the fact that she killed their own child. Or maybe she helped someone else end the life of their child. It’s like she has to slide down a cliff with jagged rocks waiting for her at the bottom. We can help ease her fall and mitigate the pain and injury. We would want someone else to help us down that same cliff as gently as possible, so let’s do that for others by how we communicate with them.
There are a tremendous amount of painful, weighty things people have to work through when faced with the opportunity to change their mind about abortion. Having to acknowledge that you have been wrong about something so important feels crushing for some. Remembering that we all have been mistaken about things in the past will help us humbly and patiently stand alongside another person as they make these shifts in their view.
I recommend reading Common Ground Without Compromise by Stephen Wagner to get practical ideas on how you can find common ground in conversations with those who disagree with you.
It’s helpful to use the preferred labels each side uses to describe their view. This might sound more controversial up front. Here’s what I mean. Some pro-lifers in conversation with a pro-choice person insist that she is “pro-abortion” even if the person has just said she is “pro-choice.” When she says she is not “pro-abortion” the pro-life person asks her what choice she is for and when she says something like the “right of a woman to choose abortion,” the pro-life person says she is “pro-abortion.” This rhetorical move is not helpful if your goal is good conversation that can lead to a changed mind. Imagine how it feels for pro-lifers when people insist we are just “pro-birth.” We don’t like it when people reframe our position in a way that sounds foreign to us. People are not going to be as open as they would be otherwise if they feel like they are just being cornered and told by others what their view is.
It’s not because I don’t think labels or ways people describe themselves are important. I agree the words we use to describe ourselves should be accurate, and I can understand the desire to attack the “choice” language since a preborn child’s death shouldn’t be reduced to such a positive-sounding sentiment.
We have so many problems to deal with and so many bad ideas to dismantle in conversations about abortion. I look at it this way: there are primary and secondary issues. The primary issue is that abortion kills a human being, and I want to help people understand that. If that means I have to tolerate or ignore the “choice” language, I am willing to do that. The conversation should be focused on the humanity of the preborn child and how their rights are gravely violated by abortion. If we do this, the labels will fix themselves in the long run.
We have a limited amount of time with the people in front of us, and it is important to use that time in the best way possible. I want them to get a little closer to understanding the violence and evil of abortion. I have found I have a much better chance of doing that when I ignore the inaccurate aspects of their labels and focus on the humanity of preborn children. If I helped the person have a more accurate label but did not help her have a more accurate view of the preborn, I don’t think I used my time very wisely.
Talking about abortion doesn’t have to be as difficult as it may seem. If you use these tips, I’m confident you will have good conversations. Some of my early conversations were not productive because I didn’t use these skills, and I said things I shouldn’t have. While I wish I could go back and do some of those conversations over again, I’m also thankful I didn’t just give up and walk away.
It’s important that we are willing to make mistakes in conversations because the fact that we are making mistakes is a normal part of engaging others in important conversations in the pursuit of justice. Don’t let the fear of bad conversations keep you from saying anything at all. Let those conversations that didn’t go so well in the past propel you to study more, seek advice from mentors, and be willing to try again. The more you do that, the better advocate you will become.
To get trained to utilize these skills in difficult conversations, consider attending a Justice For All pro-life apologetics seminar. If there is no in-person option that works for you, consider taking our online Love3 Workshops.
February 2024 Impact Report
When our team conducts campus outreach, we start conversations with people of all different types. What’s pretty common among all of this diversity, though, is the tendency for people to hide behind various kinds of masks. On Halloween every year, these masks are visible. On all other days, the masks are invisible but nonetheless present.
In this Impact Report, JFA trainer Rebekah Dyer tells the story of one conversation that had both the visible type of mask and the invisible type of mask. In the conversation, she modeled an excellent approach each of us can use as Christian ambassadors to build trust in order to help people come out from behind their masks and partner with us in finding truth.
Steve Wagner, Executive Director
Rebekah spoke with another masked man on Halloween at the University of North Texas (UNT) in fall 2023.
On Halloween last year, I was at the University of North Texas, and I noticed a man in a scary, tan-colored mask with no mouth and black eyes. He was looking at our embryology pictures.
I asked him what he thought about abortion. He shrugged and motioned to his mask. An interesting interaction ensued as I asked him questions, and he tried to answer with hand motions. Here’s the gist of the conversation that followed:
At UNT, a banana signed “No, abortion should not be legal.” Seth (hat) is visible talking to another student.
“Wait,” I asked, “can you not talk in the mask?” He nodded. “Is it that tight?” He nodded again. “How long have you been wearing it?” He made a motion with his hands. “You’ve been wearing it for twenty-one hours?” I asked, surprised. With an exasperated sigh he motioned again. “Two and a half hours?” I guessed again. He nodded vigorously. “Wow!” I said. “Well, if you want to chat, I’ll be around.”
“This is gonna look bad, but I’m going to sign,” said the Grim Reaper to JFA trainer Kristina at UNT. Then she proceeded to sign “Yes” on our poll.
I stepped away to make some notes about another conversation I had had that day. A few minutes later the student took off his mask, and we began to have a normal conversation. “Landon” told me he was in the middle on this issue. As I asked him questions, he shared that he thought abortion should be broadly legal so that women who have life-threatening complications during pregnancy have access to abortion. He shared that he had a friend who had been raped and had gotten pregnant at thirteen years old. This friend had also had seven abortions. Landon also told me people should be educated about abortion so that they know that it kills another human being.
As we spoke, I was hearing some conflicting things from Landon, so I asked the following question to help clarify some of the confusion:
Rebekah: What if we could have a law that made elective abortion broadly illegal, but had an exception for cases where the life of the mother is in danger?
Landon: Oh, that’s brilliant!
Rebekah: That’s what the current law is in Texas.
Landon was surprised and told me he agreed with the current law. As our conversation began to wind down he confessed something to me:
Landon: I need to apologize to you. I lied to you earlier. I can talk just fine in this mask. I was worried that you were going to yell at me when I walked up. I wanted to check out the signs, but I didn’t want to talk to anyone.
Rebekah: Thank you for telling me. I forgive you. I can understand why it might feel intimidating to come up to this display if you have that fear.
During our conversation, he shared with me that he was a Christian. Whenever someone tells me he is a Christian, I always ask him what he means by that. Landon answered by referencing the Nicene Creed.
This conversation highlights a few important things. First, if we jump to challenging people the moment we hear something with which we disagree, we can easily talk past them and address a view they don’t hold. In every conversation, it is crucial that we ask good questions and listen in order to understand the other person’s views. Landon went from sounding like he was in the middle on this issue, to sounding very pro-choice, to finally clarifying that he was actually opposed to the vast majority of abortions. If I hadn’t slowed down and asked Landon questions, I could have missed what he was trying to communicate.
Second, many people are unaware of the abortion laws in their own state. There is also a lot of apathy and ignorance surrounding what abortion is and what it does to another human being. When we have conversations about these things we have the opportunity to inform people and help move their hearts toward loving forgotten human beings, especially the unborn.
Third, many people are understandably uncomfortable talking about abortion. They are afraid of being verbally attacked, yelled at, and ridiculed. I understand that fear because I’ve had those experiences, and it affected the way I felt going into some future conversations. I’ve learned that acting against my fear and discomfort is necessary and something I’m called to do as a Christian. God meets us in those places of fear, and He empowers us to engage in the midst of difficult situations. By treating people with kindness and gentleness, we can invite others to engage in the conversation in spite of their fears.
In my experience, most conversations about abortion are not hostile. When people see that I want to have a civil conversation about an important issue, they are open to engaging in a respectful way. I think we can give people a gift on multiple levels. We can give them a good experience in a conversation about a difficult topic by asking questions, listening, and truly understanding them. Then we can help them get closer to the truth by challenging them to stop tolerating the killing of innocent children in the womb.
Free Speech Board comment at the University of Kansas.
“The fetus is just a parasite.” Some pro-choice advocates make this claim, and they can mean very different things by referring to unborn children as “parasites”. A student at Kansas University wrote the following:
The women’s rights should take precedence over the rights of a parasite (technical definition of a fetus in the 1st trimester) because she is already an existing human who has every right to decline to birth something that she might not be able to take care of, or would be psychologically traumatic to raise or give up. NOT YOUR BODY, NOT YOUR CHOICE.
Let’s break down some aspects of this comment:
“The women’s rights should take precedence over the rights of a parasite (technical definition of a fetus in the 1st trimester)…” If after asking clarification questions you find that the person is using the parasite language in a biological sense, it’s important to point out that fetuses do not fit the scientific criteria for parasitism. JFA Trainer Rebekah Dyer notes this in her article Human Fetuses are Not Parasites:
fetuses do “not match the biological definition of a parasite. 'Biologically defined, parasitism is a “form of symbiosis in which one organism (called a parasite) benefits at the expense of another organism usually of different species (called a host). This host-parasite association may eventuate to the injury of the host.' In order to understand the relationship between mother and fetus, we need to look at the various types of symbiosis. There are three kinds of symbiosis: commensalism, mutualism and parasitism. In commensalism, only one species benefits while the other is neither harmed nor benefited. In mutualism, both partners benefit. In parasitism, one organism benefits while the other suffers harm."
The parasite claim is often complex and the person using the term can mean different things by it. Sometimes the person doesn’t mean it in a biological sense at all. Rebekah Dyer’s second article on the parasite term goes more into depth on this aspect of the “parasite” claim some pro-choice advocates make, and she provides insight on how to navigate that in conversation.
Note that the writer of this comment states that the woman is “already an existing human” implying the additional phrase, “unlike the unborn who is not an existing human yet.” But this is merely an assumption. It begs the central question “What is the unborn?” Then the comment concludes with a bodily rights statement at the end.
To learn how to respond to comments like these, sign up for our Love3 Workshops.
My team spent three days at Boise State University in August. Although abortion is banned in Idaho, most of the students who voted on our poll were pro-choice, suggesting that the laws are vulnerable to change.
A female student at Boise State University charged towards me and, with all her might, tried to rip the “No” sign off our poll table. Everyone’s attention turned to her. She seemed to have zero shame. I contemplated calling the police but first wanted to give her a chance to redeem herself, if she was willing. Whatever I would say, I needed to avoid adding more fuel to the fire.
Kristina: It looks like you’re very passionate about this issue. Would you be open to sharing why?
Like many students I meet on campus, she was angry that her perceived right to abortion was up for debate. As she spoke, I built rapport by acknowledging any common ground we had and refraining from challenging her accusations. She must have realized that I wasn’t her enemy because she started to cool down.
Changing the subject, she asked:
Student: Are you one of those homophobic people?
Kristina: I do think that marriage is for a man and a woman. If you’re interested, I’d be happy to share why.
Student: Jesus taught love and kindness. I just wish more people were kind to each other.
Kristina: I do, too. Do you think, though, that trying to damage our display exhibited kindness?
Her face flushed with embarrassment.
Student: I am so sorry about that. I just had a “flipping tables in the temple” moment. I was angry, and when I get angry, I can hardly control myself.
Her demeanor continued to soften.
As I asked more questions about her life, I learned that she was raised in the Episcopalian church, her parents were divorced, and her dad had a boyfriend.
Student: Jesus preached against judging people, and he actually thought highly of women. He was even kind to prostitutes.
Kristina: He did treat women well, which was countercultural at the time. In the story of the woman caught in adultery, he challenged the Pharisees who were accusing her by saying, “Let the man without sin cast the first stone.” But do you know what he did afterwards?
Student: No, what did he do?
Kristina: He said to the adulterous woman, “Go, and sin no more.” He taught repentance. So Jesus’ full message is faith in him accompanied by love and repentance. We have to turn from our sin.
Student: What does “sin” mean?
She seemed to know so much, yet so little at the same time, but she was enthusiastic to learn.
I walked her through the story of the fall in the Garden of Eden, how each of us has disobeyed God by violating the moral law, and how Jesus is the only way to freedom from sin. I also shared why marriage is a covenant that can only exist between a man and a woman. While she didn’t agree with my explanation, she didn’t argue with it either.
Kristina: Would it be alright if I prayed with you right now?
Student: Sure!
We bowed our heads. I thanked God for our conversation and the unique gifts that He gave her. I also asked that her heart would be opened to knowing Jesus and to turning from the sin in her life. Then it was time for her next class.
Student: I learned a lot today, and I really appreciated this conversation. Again, I am so sorry for trying to damage your display.
It was like the woman I met earlier that morning was a new person! We said our goodbyes and parted ways.
Thank you for your prayers and support as I continue in this mission. It’s through experiences like these that I know the Holy Spirit is with my team and moving in the people with whom we speak. God generously gives second chances, and witnessing the character growth of this student was a humbling reminder of the countless redemptive opportunities He continues to offer me (and every one of us!).
After our team finished setting up at Colorado State University for the day, I walked over to our poll table which asked the question, “Should Abortion Remain Legal?”
A young man I’ll call “David” walked over and signed the yes side. After I greeted him, I began to ask him about his beliefs. He believed the unborn is human, and he did not like abortion. Nevertheless, he felt that abortion should be legal because he did not want the government controlling what we can and cannot do. Our conversation went something like this:
Outreach at Palomar College in California October 2023
Andrea: I agree with you that choice is important. Obviously, we live in America where we have many freedoms. It is important to be able to make choices as long as these choices do not harm other human beings.
David: Yeah, I get that.
Andrea: We probably agree that murder, rape, and child abuse is wrong and should not be legal, right?
David: Yes.
Andrea: We have laws in place against those actions to protect human beings from harm. For example, it is illegal for someone to come to this campus and start shooting because that “choice” would harm other human beings. It is the same with the abortion issue. Since the unborn is a living human being, abortion is a choice that takes the life of an innocent human being.
David: Wow! I have never thought about it that way. That makes sense.
Andrea: Another way to think about it is to imagine that we have two buckets. One bucket is full of choices like your favorite ice cream flavor, what degree you want to get, your favorite sport, and so forth. These would be personal preferences. I think we agree that we should have the freedom to make those choices. The other bucket is full of choices that harm another human being, like murder, rape, and child abuse. Which bucket would you say abortion belongs in? (Read more about how my colleague Tammy Cook came up with this two-bucket analogy at www.jfaweb.org/two-buckets)
David: Oh…I would have to say that abortion belongs in the bucket of choices that harm another human being!
I often talk to people like David who believe the unborn is a living human being and believe abortion is wrong, but also think it should be legal because they feel it is merely a personal preference. It is helpful to point out why abortion should be illegal. Since the unborn is a living human being, elective abortion kills an innocent child. Therefore, elective abortion should not be legal.
As we enter the Thanksgiving and Christmas season, I want to thank you for all your prayers and support. As I reflect back on all God has done this year, I am in awe. It has been incredible to see Him at work. It is people like you who make it possible for me to have these conversations and to help JFA behind the scenes as we work to train many Christians to do the same! If you are not part of my support team, please prayerfully consider joining by giving an end-of-year gift or a monthly pledge.
It’s common for pro-life and pro-choice advocates alike to assume the pro-life position is inherently religious.
For pro-life advocates, we encourage them to consider beginning conversations with secular arguments in order to not put unnecessary stumbling blocks in someone’s way. We also ask pro-life advocates to consider that even if they hold religious reasons for their position, they can also hold non-religious, publicly-accessible reasons for their position that can persuade the masses in a pluralistic society such as ours in 21st century US. See, for example, Rebecca Hotovy’s “#Mindblown” conversation with Brian. Brian began with the belief that he could not support a law against abortion because his reason for his pro-life view was religious. He believed it was wrong to put his religious view into law. Rebecca Hotovy deftly showed him that he also held his position for a reason that didn’t rely on explicitly religious support: it’s wrong and should be illegal to harm someone else.
For pro-choice advocates, we encourage them to consider the fact that there are many pro-life advocates who are agnostics or atheists. The gutsy new presidential candidate Terrisa Bukovinac is one high-profile example. The apologists at Secular Pro-Life are examples as well. Many of the folks at Libertarians for Life are also non-religious.
For pro-life and pro-choice advocates alike, we recommend the following resources from these atheistic and agnostic pro-life advocates. While we don’t agree with the atheism or agnosticism of the authors of these resources, they nonetheless contain many good arguments and truth claims, and they can help religious pro-life advocates frame their arguments in ways that are more persuasive to the average non-religious person. This is right in line with our emphasis on finding common ground when possible.
“Later Abortion”: Very helpful microsite filled with links and research curated by Secular Pro-Life to show that “There is no quantifiable data to support the idea that all or even most later abortions are medically necessary.” It includes a collection of data on the reasons women opt for later abortion. This helps us respond to claims that “no late-term abortion is elective.”
“Embryonic Hearts”: This microsite demonstrates that the unborn has a primitive heartbeat from very early in development and describes the development of the heart from scientific textbooks.
Resources from Secular Pro-Life Related to the Question of Rape
“I’m an Emergency Physician. Pro-Life Laws Don’t Threaten My Patients.” One doctor’s perspective on abortion restrictions in Texas since Dobbs.
Guardian article “What a pregnancy actually looks like” erases embryos
Responding to 16 pro-choice claims about Dobbs, the pro-life movement, and abortion bans
Why artificial wombs pose a challenge to pro-choice personhood arguments
The pro-choice view survives on widespread ignorance of biology
In one sense, conversations about abortion are really simple. Abortion kills an innocent human being, and that shouldn’t be legal.
Psychologically and emotionally though, this issue is incredibly complicated. People’s stories and their experiences influence how they view and understand simple ideas. When deep pain and trauma are influencing their views, those simple ideas can become complicated.
I talked to “Emily” at Fullerton College in January. My colleague Jon Wagner shared with me afterward that she had signed our free speech board and had written something about abortion being an issue of women’s bodily rights. He said she was visibly agitated and shaking.
From the free speech board, she went to our poll table where I asked her if she wanted to share her thoughts. She quickly told me that our display was disturbing to her. She didn’t like it and said the pictures of embryology were “harmful.” She told me our outreach on campus was “part of the problem” and didn’t do justice to what is going on with this issue. While I did not agree that our display was “harmful,” the things she shared throughout our conversation helped me begin to understand why she felt the way she did.
When I started asking her questions, she told me that she had a friend who was raped and became pregnant. Her friend decided to keep the baby, but she committed suicide shortly after giving birth. She was only thirteen. (Her baby is now five years old.)
She also shared with me that she has a friend who was addicted to meth when he was born due to the choices of the mother. She told me that this friend doesn’t like her life and that she doesn’t want to live anymore. In addition to this, Emily told me that she has a condition where if she got pregnant, she could either keep taking her medication and her baby would be severely deformed or she could stop taking her medicine, the baby would be fine, but she would die after giving birth.
At some point in our conversation, she also shared with me that she was a Christian and thought that abortion was murder in the third trimester. Earlier in pregnancy though, she said that we cannot have laws against abortion, because there are too many circumstances that the law can’t take into account.
Pain and tragedy deeply affect people. The suffering in their pasts can warp their perspectives on issues that are morally clear. Those clear issues become unclear to them when they look at them through the lens of the shattered lives of themselves or their friends. Knowing this can help us understand why good and clear arguments appear to make no headway with some people. I know it can be frustrating when we lay out a clear case for something we believe to be true and are only met with statements that seem to show the other person is “not getting it.”
In a conversation at Fullerton in January 2023.
I think taking a step back and really engaging with the pain people experience can help us be empathetic and compassionate while we speak up for the rights of unborn human beings in this country.
Towards the end of our conversation, Emily told me that while she loves the five-year-old child her friend chose to have after she was raped, she wishes she could have her friend back instead. In Emily’s mind, if her friend had chosen abortion, she would still be here. The abortion would have “saved” her life. As odd as that may sound to us, I think that kind of statement points us to something important.
Sometimes it can feel like we just need the right argument or the right response to refute wrong beliefs. I think knowing good arguments is incredibly important because they do impact people’s views and their behavior. But sometimes, arguments aren’t going to do what we want them to do with someone who is still grieving the loss of her friend. It’s a matter of triage. When someone is bleeding out, has a sprained ankle, a broken arm, and some minor cuts, we have to assess which injury is most urgent and focus on it first. All of them are important, but we can’t focus on all of them at once.
Given the length of my conversation with Emily, I did end up making the case for why abortion is not a good solution to the tragic circumstances she talked about. No matter how great our pain is, it doesn’t give us the right to kill another human being. In these kinds of conversations, I don’t always present arguments. It’s not because I don’t care about making good arguments for why unborn children should be protected legally. It’s because sometimes given the time I have, I decide that making an argument is not the best thing to do at that moment. I trust that God will bring someone else in her life later when she is more willing and ready to hear arguments that challenge her beliefs.
I think it’s a judgment call we all need to make at times. Do I make an argument and address her incorrect beliefs now? Do I just listen and empathize with her? Do I do both? I believe we can trust that God will guide us as we make these decisions in our conversations.
Even in the midst of darkness, great evil, and tragedy, life is worth living and protecting because we serve Jesus, God in human flesh, who rose out of his own tomb victorious over death and evil. Even though this is true, there are so many people who do not feel like life is worth living, and that chasm is something we have the privilege of helping close. In this valley of tears, may we be willing to enter into uncomfortable and difficult conversations with others so that we can bridge this gap together.
At Justice For All, we are passionate about creating a space for healthy dialogue about divisive issues. While most of our conversations are centered around abortion, our training skills are applicable to any situation where disagreement exists.
After losing some friends over political disagreements, Ted Wetzler, an Ohio resident, started an organization called "Dinner and a Fight," with the word "fight" crossed out and replaced with "dialogue." He brings people together for a meal with all different viewpoints and helps foster good communication and understanding. His organization is worth checking out!
To learn skills for having productive dialogue about abortion, and by extension, any controversial issue, take our online Love3 workshops.
Stacey walked up to our outreach signs looking curious. We were standing on a busy walkway at Palomar College (CA) in December. I asked a few questions about her thoughts on abortion, and she clarified that she thought abortion should be legal until birth. Here’s my recollection of the rest of the conversation:
Steve: Do you believe abortion should be legal because you believe a woman has a right to her body?
Stacey: Yes. A woman’s right to her body is really important to me.
Steve: I agree that a woman has a right to her body, generally speaking, and I agree that’s really important. Women’s bodily rights have been trampled on and continue to be trampled on throughout the world with practices like slavery, rape, and domestic violence. I think those things are horrific and wrong.
Palomar College Outreach in December 2022: Steve (center, black shirt) and other JFA staff members interact with students.
Stacey: I agree.
Steve: Do you agree with me that a woman’s bodily rights are not simply created or determined by the state? Instead, they’re fundamental. They’re like other human rights. If the state didn’t protect those rights, the state would be wrong.
Stacey: Yes, that’s true.
Pages 4-5 of JFA’s Invitation to Dialogue Brochure.
Steve: I have some pictures over here that might be helpful to our conversation. [I showed her the signs that show pages four and five of the Invitation to Dialogue Brochure.] Look at this young woman pictured here. Can we agree that she has bodily rights that the state should respect?
Stacey: I agree with that.
JFA’s setup at the National Mall on April 26-27 included the signs Steve referred to in his conversation with Stacey.
Steve: Now, what about this toddler? I assume we would agree he shouldn’t be killed. Can we agree he has bodily rights that are fundamental?
Stacey: Yes.
Steve: So the woman and the toddler have the same bodily rights. And those rights are fundamental, so the situation would have to reach a really high bar to justify limiting something so important as a person’s bodily rights. Perhaps the only legitimate way the state could limit those rights is if these people were using their bodies to take away someone else’s bodily rights.
Stacey: That’s a good point.
Steve: Does it make sense to you that if their rights are fundamental, they had them from the moment they began to exist? When did this toddler begin to exist?
Stacey: That makes sense, but I guess I’m not sure. What do you think?
Steve: Well, from fertilization [pointing at image on sign], when the sperm and the egg came together, both ceased to exist, and a new organism came into existence. All that’s been added from then until the toddler stage is food. If we have something as important as fundamental human rights now, I don’t think we could gain those rights by eating. So, I think the woman and the toddler began to exist at fertilization, and that’s also when they gained their fundamental right to their bodies. But that would mean that the embryo has a fundamental right to his body just like the toddler and the woman.
Our conversation continued for ten minutes or so. (Indeed, Stacey contributed much more detailed responses than what my memory has allowed me to include here.) We discussed how the embryo is very different from us (in looks and functions) but is also the same kind of being that we are—a being with the same human nature we have. If this is true, the woman’s fundamental right to her body would not include the right to abortion, because then abortion would be killing a human being with the same bodily rights.
As Stacey got ready to move on from the conversation, she eagerly accepted a copy of the Invitation to Dialogue Brochure that included the same pictures we had been discussing. What she said in parting really surprised me:
Stacey: I never thought about the fetus as a separate person—that it has its own rights we would be taking away. I’ll have to think about that!
At the beginning of this conversation, Stacey sounded completely pro-choice, and frankly, I think I suspected she wouldn’t have much interest in an alternative opinion. She showed the exact opposite throughout our conversation. It’s a lesson I’ve learned again and again: Don’t make assumptions from appearances.
As I found common ground with Stacey repeatedly about bodily rights, showing relational sensitivity to the emotionally heavy topic of what a woman can do with her body, I think she became open to my perspective about the unborn child. That’s the sequence we teach any chance we can: Be relational…then be intellectual. That approach helped Stacey to consider the possibility there was a whole other person involved in the abortion question, and she showed genuine interest in thinking further about that.
Note: This letter is the second in a series of letters on conversation skills we teach volunteers that help them get started having conversations and encourage them to stay active. See “Be a Playmaker” (Feb. 2023) for the first in the series. (March 2024 Update: The third letter in the series, “Only Two Questions?” has just been published. Read it here.)
In this Impact Report, we share the names and pictures of some of the people with whom our team interacted in 2022. Please join us in praying that God will take the seeds we planted and change the world, one person at a time. Pray each person would love and protect the children in their care. Pray for healing from past hurts, and pray each heart would become open to God.
Would you join us in committing to pray for each of these people in the coming months?
You can use the images below (7 total) to pray through the list from your phone or other device with us this year?
To view more pictures and read recent stories of conversations, see other recent posts on the JFA blog.
There’s still time to give a year-end gift to help Justice For All train many Christians to reach one person at a time in 2023. Thank you for supporting our team and for praying along with us.
Most of my conversations on campus tend to focus specifically on abortion, the rights of unborn human beings, and how we can balance those rights with protecting and respecting a woman’s right to her body.
Rebekah speaks to a student at Texas State University in October 2022
In the midst of discussing these topics, there is often a natural segue to discuss the deeper worldview questions of why humans matter all and whether we can really know if anything is morally right or wrong. I talked to a young man I’ll call “Ethan” at Wichita State University in September, and our conversation quickly turned to these deeper questions.
He told me early in the conversation that even if abortion is killing a human being, it wouldn’t matter. I sensed this statement was coming from a complicated and maybe even painful place within him so I asked him if he thought human beings in general mattered. I asked him if he thought his life mattered. I speak with many people on campus who don’t think their life matters. If they cannot understand their own worth and value, it’s going to be even more difficult to help them understand the value and dignity of another human being they cannot see.
Ethan and I found a place to sit down, and we began talking about how we can know what is right and wrong. We discussed moral relativism, the existence of God, why humans matter, and the gospel of Jesus Christ.
He shared with me that he was gay, had many bad experiences in the church, and was bullied a lot in school. As we talked, I was able to tell him that his life does matter, and I was able to encourage him to read the gospels and get to know Jesus, the only one who can heal all our brokenness and set us free from our sin. A couple of hours later, Ethan came back as we were getting ready to leave campus, and he wanted to know if I had anything else I had wanted to share. So we sat down again, and I encouraged him a second time to seek Jesus and read His word.
Rebekah had a similar conversation with this young man Texas State University in October 2022
When Ethan came back, it reminded me of how deep the desire is in the human spirit to truly understand why we are here. Human beings matter and should be equally protected from violence and harm because they have intrinsic worth given from the Creator. Abortion is such a monumental issue in our country and around the world because people have forsaken God. They have rejected his call on their lives, and how they ought to love and treat others. When they live according to their own rules, human beings suffer. Violence and injustice become defended virtues.
When Jesus healed a demon-possessed man from the Gerasenes, he told the man to go back to his hometown and tell them how much God had done for him. (Luke 8:39) Our freedom in Christ and the healing we have received from Jesus is meant to be shared. May we always be willing and ready to go and tell people how much God has done for us.
By Grace Fontenot, JFA Training Specialist
“Will you talk to me about abortion? Please just tell me about it!” This was not what I expected to hear upon returning to my host home on a recent JFA trip. My hosts were out on a date, and they had informed me that they would have their new babysitter staying with their kids that evening, and that she’d let me into the house. The kids were already in bed when I knocked on the door, and their babysitter, “Heidi,” answered. She turned out to be a sweet, friendly young woman, and a student at a local university.
Heidi and I hit it off immediately. We began chatting, and pretty soon she asked me why I was visiting the area, so I explained to her the work that I do with Justice For All. I told her that through speaking and mentoring, I help train pro-life advocates to defend their beliefs in a way that balances truth and love in every conversation. She then enthusiastically said, “Will you talk to me? Will you give me one of your talks?” I was happily surprised, and we sat down in the cozy living room where I then asked her if she’d share her thoughts on abortion. Our conversation went something like this:
Heidi: I believe that little life has a soul, and I don’t think it’s my place to “play God” by ending that life through abortion. But I don’t think that I can allow my religious beliefs to limit the choices of others who don’t share them when it comes to making public policies. So I can’t say that I think abortion should be made illegal.
Grace: I understand your concern for the freedom of others, and not wanting to force people to live by religious standards they don’t hold. Can I ask you a question, though? I’ve talked to a lot of people about abortion, and I’ve noticed that people have different reasons for why they hold their views. Why are you pro-life?
Grace in conversation in front of the Art of Life exhibit during JFA’s outreach at University of Kansas (KU) in March 2018.
Heidi: I think because I’ve always wanted to be a mom. My mom has always said I was born to be a mother. I was raised pro-life, but like I said, I don’t think I can tell others that they can’t get an abortion.
Grace: Do you believe that there are some things mentioned in the Bible, which we believe as
Christians, that also should be laws? For example, one of the Ten Commandments is “Thou shalt not kill.” Do you think we should make murder legal because the law against it may be influenced by a Christian belief?
Heidi: No, of course not! You’re right, that law makes sense for everyone even though it’s also a Christian belief.
Grace: This may sound like a weird question to ask, but what is the definition of murder?
Heidi: It’s when you kill an innocent person… and if abortion kills a human being, then it must be murder!
Notice how I first built common ground with Heidi. I tried to identify with her discomfort about forcing others, by law, to comply with a belief system they don’t currently hold. Because of this, Heidi felt heard and understood. After I built common ground, though, I raised an example of a law that coincides with our religious beliefs, but which can clearly be legally applied to all citizens regardless of religion. Heidi quickly recognized that outlawing abortion falls into this category. If abortion kills an innocent human being, it is not only morally wrong, but must be legally outlawed for everyone.
Heidi began to realize that if abortion kills an innocent human being, it must be restricted legally. This naturally took us into the next part of our conversation, in which we discussed the humanity of the unborn, biologically. It was such a fun conversation because we were both becoming increasingly excited! I was curious about her views on the biology of the unborn, so I decided to clarify whether or not we held the same beliefs on that subject. My hope in asking these questions was to make her more confident in her position against abortion.
Grace: I remember you mentioning earlier the word “life,” and I’m curious, what does the word “life” mean for you? You may have noticed I ask for definitions pretty often, and that’s because, over time, I’ve realized that people can have different intended definitions for the same words.
Heidi: Oh, okay. Well, actually, I was just studying this! [Heidi excitedly took out her course notes to reference them.] When I say “life,” I think I mean development. I’m in a developmental motor skills class, and I was just reading about how, from the moment that fertilization is completed, development is happening!
Grace: So if the unborn is developing from the point of fertilization, would you agree that it must be alive?
Heidi: Yes.
Grace: Would you further agree with me that, because living things reproduce after their own kind, the unborn must also be human?
Heidi: Yes.
Grace: And do you agree that the unborn is a whole organism?
Heidi: I... think so…
She said this slowly. I could tell she wasn’t sure what I meant, so I asked a follow-up question to clarify terms and to make sure that Heidi and I were on the same page.
Grace: What do you mean when you use the word “organism”?
Heidi: Hmmm. I don’t know exactly. What is the definition of the word “organism”?
Grace: I can’t give you the exact definition off of the top of my head, but an organism is an individual life form. For example, the leaf of the plant on the table next to you is a part of the whole organism, which is the plant. In the same way, your thumb is a part of your body; but you, Heidi, are the whole organism. So in the same way, sperm and egg are functional parts of a man and a woman. However, when they combine, they cease being parts of another person’s body, and a new whole organism comes into existence, on its own self-directed path of development. Does that make sense? (Note: See our Extending Your Learning page to read Maureen Condic's excellent article on this topic, “Life: Defining the Beginning by the End.”)
Heidi: Yes! So the unborn is the same kind of thing that we are; it’s just at a different stage of development!
We were then interrupted by one of the kids coming downstairs complaining of a sore throat. After administering medicine and sending him back up to bed, Heidi and I continued our conversation.
Notice that instead of simply telling Heidi that she had a misunderstanding about the biology of the unborn, I asked her questions so that I could think through it alongside her. In Justice For All’s Abortion: from Debate to Dialogue seminar, I help to train participants to dialogue about the biological humanity of the unborn. One way that we do this is through a tool developed by Steve Wagner. This tool can be said in ten seconds (below), or broken down more slowly in a conversation, as exemplified in my dialogue with Heidi.
Steve calls this the 10-Second Pro-life Apologist. Here’s how it goes:
If the unborn is growing, isn’t it alive?
And if it has human parents, isn’t it human?
And living humans, or human beings like you and me, are valuable, aren’t they?
I want to encourage you to have your own conversations about abortion, and remember that it doesn’t take years of study and experience to ask thought-provoking questions, to listen, and to point out areas of agreement. It is helpful, however, to have a little bit of knowledge of the biological development of the unborn, so that you can refer to it as I did in my conversation with Heidi. To help you further defend the biological humanity of the unborn, I’ve listed bullet points from the interactive guide participants use in our seminar.
1. The unborn is living.
Growth through cellular reproduction
Reacting to stimuli
Metabolizing food for energy
2. The unborn is human.
Has human parents (living things reproduce after their own kind)
Has a DNA fingerprint unique to the human species
3. The unborn is a whole organism.
Integrating its body parts for the good of the whole
Actively developing itself through the stages of human development
If adults are organisms, and all that was added to them from fertilization was a proper environment and adequate nutrition, then the unborn at fertilization must have been an organism as well.
When I last wrote, I paused the story when one of the kids whom Heidi was babysitting complained of a sore throat. After helping him and sending him back to bed, Heidi and I continued our conversation:
Heidi: One of my main concerns is that I live in a city that is very liberal, and being pro-life is not popular. I don’t want to be considered…
Grace: Anti-woman?
Heidi: Yeah!
Her eyes widened. It seemed to be a comfort that I understood why she felt torn. I then asked her if she would like for me to explain to her the reasons I can call myself a feminist and a pro-life advocate. “I would love it if you would,” she replied with a big smile stretching across her face.
I then shared with Heidi the Equal Rights Argument*, a series of questions that can help someone to understand that equal rights can only be based on something that we all share equally, and the thing we share equally that best explains our equal rights is our common humanity.
Grace: Let’s take a step away from the topic of abortion for a moment. Do you agree that all born human beings deserve equal treatment? If you agree that we deserve to be treated equally, then there must be something equal or the same about us, right? So what is the same about us that demands our equal treatment?
Heidi: It’s that we’re human! I think I know where you’re going with this!
Grace discusses equal rights with a pro-choice student next to the art table at JFA’s outreach to the University of Kansas in March 2018.
Grace: Yes, you’re right! See, the reason that racism and sexism are wrong is because we all deserve to be treated equally based on our common humanity; so, if the unborn are also human like we are, they have to be included in the group of beings that have equal rights.
Now let’s turn to feminism. If I claim that I deserve equal rights as a woman because I am equally human to men, but then I turn around and say that I also deserve the right to end the life of someone else who is equally human to me through abortion, then I would be betraying the foundation of my feminist beliefs. So it actually makes more sense to be a pro-life feminist than it does to be a pro-choice one!
Heidi: That’s so helpful! Feminism is such a big deal right now, and I’m a woman! I don’t want to be accused of being anti-woman, but I also don’t want to have to sacrifice my pro-life beliefs. Thank you so much for discussing this with me.
Before heading upstairs to my room for the evening, I decided to ask Heidi if the conversation had impacted her views on abortion in any way. In the same fashion as she had handled the entire conversation, Heidi took time to think carefully before replying. She paused and then shared an incredibly encouraging answer:
Heidi: I grew up in a very conservative town. I remember ignoring any conversation about politics because my dad and my friends’ dads would talk about politics constantly. But now, I feel as though I need to be more informed about politics so that I can start voting and form my own opinions on different political subjects. I feel so excited because, since talking to you, I feel like I know the reasons why I believe what I believe about abortion. I feel confident now that I can share them, and I can participate in conversations about the topic because the reasons backing up my position are sound.
Heidi and I had a fantastic conversation, covering almost every topic in JFA’s Abortion: From Debate to Dialogue seminars. I’m so thankful that we were able to talk that evening because now Heidi feels equipped to share her views with those within her sphere of influence. She told me at the end of our conversation that she leads a Bible study on her campus for freshman girls, and that she hopes to have a conversation with them about unplanned pregnancy and abortion in the future.
You never know how far one conversation can go, and you never know how many people it can impact. This is a perfect example of starting conversations about abortion in everyday life. For multiple conversation starter ideas, see the JFA blog. Here’s one example: You could start a conversation with a friend by sharing JFA’s social media post titled, “Can She Embrace Both?” The idea of starting a conversation may seem intimidating, but if we are truly serious about protecting mothers, fathers, and babies from abortion, then a little bit of awkwardness is a small sacrifice to pay.
Do you agree that we all deserve equal treatment, at least regarding the basic right to life?
If we deserve to be treated equally, doesn’t that mean there has to be something the same about us?
What is the same about us?
Click here for more examples of the Equal Rights Argument in action.
