executive

They Stop and Think (Then We Pray)

While our culture is drowning every day in new content embraced through shiny devices, we have the privilege of mobilizing Christians to show up to encourage each individual to stop and think. We listen to understand, ask questions with an open heart, and find common ground throughout every interaction. Then we work to challenge each person to love all of the people touched by unplanned pregnancy, especially the unborn child who is forgotten by so many. Thank you for your support!

What many people we reach don’t realize is that our team of supporters prays with us to ask and trust God to follow up and specially care for each person we’ve met. In this Impact Report, we share names and pictures of a few of the people we met in 2024. (See more pictures and stories at www.jfaweb.org/blog.) Please give a generous year-end gift to help us reach thousands more in 2025.


Pray with us for…



Let’s Cause Thousands to Stop and Think in 2025

What does it take for the content of the truth to sink into a person’s mind and heart? Is hearing or seeing enough? Our culture is filled with more data, inputs, and content than ever before, but we are at risk of being one of the least thoughtful cultures ever. The antidote? Cause people to stop and think. They need to stop not just for a moment, but for long enough to allow them to interactively consider what’s true. This is why one of our passions is conversations. (See our October Update, “Connecting the Dots” for one example.)

When our trainers and volunteers step out and create conversations, we ask questions that cause the other person to stop and think. Imagine the impact of thousands of Christians who are trained to be skillful advocates who start conversations and make them productive encounters filled with listening, asking questions, and offering respectful challenges. We’re passionate about these advocates because they then take what they’ve learned and, long after our event is over, continue changing their world one person at a time. During each outreach event we see a different kind of advocate creating a different kind of conversation, and we see the beginnings of a different kind of world in which elective abortion is unthinkable. Our strategy is aimed at long-term systemic change that’s only possible when many thousands of individual minds and hearts change. If you share our passion for conversations and advocates that God can use to change the world, please consider supporting JFA’s work with a generous year-end gift or a pledge of regular support.

When you give a gift to JFA (jfaweb.org/donate), it creates moments to “stop and think” by…

  • … transporting our trainers to events in CA, CO, TX, OK, KS, MO, NE, MI, VA, and elsewhere through flights, rental cars, and mileage reimbursements.

  • helping us be present in 10 metro areas including increased activity in Denver (Kristine), NW Arkansas (Alora), Kansas City (Kristina), and Grand Rapids (Kaitlyn). (See our August update: “New Team Members and New Cities.”)

  • … helping us reach more people through small-scale events. (See our September update: “Team Be Nimble.”)

  • … allowing us to create new copies of our smaller exhibits and to experiment with new content so we can find the tools that attract more people to stop and think.

  • … providing new dialogue brochures for our campus events.

  • … enabling us to provide Seat Work + Feet Work training to Christians in more places.

  • … providing computers, projectors, and other technologies that enable us to reach more people through workshops, presentations, emails, letters, and social media.

Thank you for partnering with JFA. If you send regular financial support or host our trainers in your home or provide meals or pray for us or volunteer at events or share our training with others, you are already doing so much to help JFA make a difference. Thank you.

Connecting the Dots

Impact Report, October 2024

As we watch results come in from the various election races and ballot initiatives over the next few weeks, let’s remember one essential activity that must continue behind the scenes, no matter who is in office or which state laws protect unborn children: connecting the dots. Let me explain. Regarding abortion, many people have an assortment of facts (or lack thereof) and viewpoints which they’ve never considered systematically. As Kaitlyn illustrates in this Impact Report, the work God has given us to do is to come alongside each person and help her spend the time necessary to reflect on the facts and arguments, put them in order, and see the truth clearly. Through the interaction, Kaitlyn saw “Alice” change opinions about the legality of abortion. What’s more, every Christian can be trained to be that person who comes alongside to help someone “connect the dots.” Thank you for helping us to train more Christians through your generous giving, and if you haven’t sent a gift recently, please consider supporting our work today.

Stephen Wagner, Executive Director


Kaitlyn (center) helps MiraCosta College students connect the dots at a recent JFA outreach event while Kristine (left) listens.

I was standing next to our free speech board at Colorado State University. A young woman I’ll call Alice walked up and began reading the comments other students had left on the board. I asked her, “Do you have thoughts on this issue?” She nodded. I said, “What are your thoughts? Do you think abortion should be legal or illegal or somewhere in the middle?” We talked for quite a while and our conversation went something like this:

Alice: I don’t like abortion, but I really don’t know what we should do about the law.

Kaitlyn: I’m hearing you. I’m curious: why would you say you don’t like abortion?

Kristina helps a student connect the dots at Mankato State University.

Alice: Because the unborn is a human being.

Kaitlyn: I’m with you. I agree that the unborn is a human being, and science is on your side, too. It is clear that the unborn is a human being when we look at biology.

Alice: [nodding]

Kaitlyn: You mentioned that you aren’t sure what we should do when it comes to making laws. Is that because choice is important to you?

Fall 2024 intern Alora Tunstill (right) helps a student to connect the dots at MiraCosta College.

Alice: Yes. We live in a free country, and people have the right to make the choices they want.

Kaitlyn: I definitely agree with you that choice is really important and that we should generally have the choice to do whatever we want. When I think about choices, there are two categories that come to mind. One is choices that don’t harm anyone. Choices like where we go to school, or how we cut our hair, or what to eat. The second category is choices that harm someone. Choices like rape and murder. It seems like, even though we think most choices should be legal, we don’t think those choices should be legal because they harm someone.

Rebekah Dyer helps a student at California State University San Marcos to connect the dots.

Alice: Yes, that’s true.

Kaitlyn: If the unborn is a human being who is killed through abortion, do you think we should make the choice of abortion illegal because it harms someone?

Alice: That’s a really good point. I think we should.

Alice and I talked a little more. She shared with me that she is a Christian and that she really wants to help protect unborn children from abortion. She listened in to some other staff members as they talked to pro-choice students. Afterwards she came back to me and asked me to help her think through some questions those conversations had raised in her mind.

There are many people around us like Alice who are pro-life for themselves but don’t know if it is right for them to tell someone else not to have an abortion or to outlaw it. These people need help to think through this issue. Often a few simple questions will help them rethink their position and take a more solid stance against abortion.

– Kaitlyn Donihue, for the JFA Team

Go Deeper: In this story, Kaitlyn put Tammy Cook’s “Two Buckets” dialogue tool in her own words when she discussed “two categories” of choices. You can find more stories utilizing this tool on our website.

More Pictures: See more recent events (Colorado, etc.) at the online version of this letter (jfaweb.org/oct-2024) and on Instagram (@picturejusticeforall).

Team Be Nimble

Team Be Nimble

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.

New Team Members and New Cities

(1) Kristine (right) talks to a student at Cal State San Marcos at JFA's outreach event in Oct. 2023

(2) Alora (center) interacts with a student at Wayne State College earlier this week (during the first week of her internship!).

Rejoice with us!

Kristine Hunerwadel (1) just joined our team as a trainer working from Denver, Colorado. Alora Tunstill (2) just began a fall internship, based in Northwest Arkansas. JFA trainer Kristina Massa (3) recently relocated to Kansas City. Kristine, Alora, and Kristina will help greatly expand JFA’s training efforts in these areas. Denver and Kansas City are established metro areas, and Northwest Arkansas is the 13th most rapidly growing metro area in the country.

(3) Kristina (center) at University of Nebraska at Kearney in May 2024.

We’re excited about these new team members and new cities, but we’re also excited about the ongoing local efforts of our trainers in other regions (see Metro Area list below). Look for us to do more in all of these areas in the coming year. Look for us also to continue our work in regions where we have dedicated volunteers and church connections even if we don’t have full-time trainers based there...yet (Arizona, Minnesota, Oklahoma, and others).

Our team is working across the country to train Christians through workshops and outreach events to change hearts and minds. Please pray that God will use these efforts to save unborn children and their parents from abortion. Would you give a special gift this month or commit to become a monthly partner to support the excellent work of these trainers?

  Steve Wagner, Executive Director


10 Metro Areas Where JFA Trainers Live

3,200,000 CA San Diego Rebekah

3,000,000 CO Denver Kristine

2,400,000 TX Austin Jeremy

8,100,000 TX Dallas Jon

590,000 AR Fayetteville Andrea, Alora

653,000 KS Wichita Paul, Tammy, Susanna

2,200,000 MO Kansas City Kristina

344,000 NE Lincoln Mary, Rebecca

2,100,000 OH Cleveland Kaitlyn

6,300,000 DC Washington Steve

(Population Numbers Refer to Metropolitan Statistical Area, per Wikipedia)


Upcoming Outreach Events

8/26-28 Wayne State College (Wayne, NE)

9/9-10 Colorado State Univ. (Fort Collins)

9/11 Univ. of Northern Colorado (Greeley)

9/30-10/1 Minnesota TBD

10/8-9 Mira Costa College (Oceanside, CA)

10/28-29 Univ. of Central Oklahoma (Edmond)

11/18-20 UTSA (San Antonio)

11/18-20 Johnson County CC (Kansas City Area)

See JFA’s Newly Redesigned Calendar Page for More Events, All Event Details, and to Register.

What God Can Do Through Every Human Being

What God Can Do Through Every Human Being

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!

Setting Starfish Free

Note: Catherine Wurts served as a JFA Trainer from 2009 until 2017. In this “Classic Reprint” of her June 2014 letter, “Setting Starfish Free,” Catherine tells one of my favorite JFA stories. In the story of “Anthony,” Catherine both makes a persuasive case for the value of unborn children and seeks to help a young man realize his own worth as “one loved by God.” She also illustrates the heartbeat of the JFA community, seeking whenever possible to open a door to deeper reflection on spiritual things, in hopes that starfish will by the Holy Spirit allow our conversations to nudge them to “dive in.” When you support JFA, you support this heartbeat on the campuses and in the churches where we train and conduct outreach across the country. Thank you for considering a special gift to JFA this month to help us train more Christians to “make a difference for even one.” - Steve Wagner, Executive Director

 

Catherine (right) interacts with a student at the University of Georgia (UGA) in March 2014.

My colleague, John Michener (bottom photo, center), often illustrates JFA’s mission by referencing the story of The Star Thrower, by Loren Eisley:

One day a man was walking along the beach when he noticed a boy picking something up and gently throwing it into the ocean. Approaching the boy, he asked, “What are you doing?” The youth replied, “Throwing starfish back into the ocean. The sun is up and the tide is going out. If I don’t throw them back, they’ll die.”

John Michener (blue tie-dye) engages Arizona State University (ASU) students in dialogue in Feb. 2014. John served as a JFA trainer from 2010 until 2014 and now directs Oklahomans United for Life: www.oklahomansunitedforlife.org.

“Son,” the man said, “don’t you realize there are miles of beach and hundreds of starfish? You can’t make a difference!” At this, the boy bent down, picked up another starfish, and threw it back into the ocean. As it met the water, he said, “I made a difference for that one.”

Who are our “starfish”? They’re the thousands of students streaming by our university Exhibit outreaches on their way to class. Many of them have had or are going to have abortions. Many others are pro-life Christians who are either silent or unloving when the topic of abortion comes up. Many, many of them are blind to the inherent dignity of the unborn – and of born people – because they have no idea how valued and loved they, themselves, are by their Creator. One significant difference between us and the boy on the beach, however, is that our “starfish” have free will. We can take them to the ocean, but they have to choose whether or not to dive in. [Editor’s note: We are not intending here to weigh in on the precise nature and interrelation of human choices and divine providence.]

Meet Anthony (name changed), a “starfish” at the University of Georgia, Athens (UGA). I met Anthony on a very rainy day in front of our Draw the Line kiosk on his campus last fall. He is a pre-med student from Egypt and has only been in the U.S. for a short time. We spoke for a while about abortion – he considered himself generally pro-life but thought abortion should be allowed in cases of rape and other difficult circumstances. We established a lot of common ground about needing to be compassionate to women and to provide resources for them. Also, he said he thought the logical argument I laid out for why abortion is not justified, even in these tough cases, was consistent and probably true.

Then he asked me, “Are you religious?”

“Yes. Why do you ask?”

He smiled as though he’d “got” me. “It seems like everyone I’ve met who’s pro-life is religious.”

“Well, I know of atheists who are pro-life,” I said, “which makes a lot of sense, doesn’t it, if the unborn is a human being? If we think about it, does a person have to be religious to recognize that murder, rape, and child abuse are wrong? The question is, ‘Is abortion a similar injustice against a human being?’ There are atheists who would say that it is.” *

Anthony agreed this made logical sense. He went on to explain that he’d been raised in an Orthodox Christian home in Egypt, but when he came to the States he put all of that behind him. He had started to think that morals are relative and that perhaps God doesn’t exist.

We talked for a while, him sharing some of his disillusionment with Christians, and me sharing that I’d had similar doubts and concerns when I was in college. I told him I admired him for asking the tough questions he was asking. Then I challenged him to look more deeply into the claims that Christianity makes before rejecting it – and before rejecting Christ. I suggested he begin by reading C.S. Lewis’s Mere Christianity. He said he would, but I thought, “How many times have I intended to read something and never gotten to it?” Then Anthony left for class. I guessed he wouldn’t read the book, and felt sure I wouldn’t see him again.

Come March of this year, I found myself in the same quad by the student center at UGA standing in front of the JFA Exhibit. I was talking with another student who was sharing very similar things with me to what Anthony had shared, but this student was decidedly more antagonistic, sarcastic, and unwilling to dialogue. All of a sudden, I noticed Anthony standing next to us, listening in! He smiled and when the other student left, Anthony said he’d come to tell me that he’d read Mere Christianity and talked a lot with his uncle. As a result, he had decided to come back to his Christian faith.

He’s started attending an Orthodox church in town and doing some service projects with them. He told me, with a huge smile on his face, “When I met you, I was obsessing about these questions about life and about God. When I would eat my food, I would be thinking, ‘Is there a God?’ Everywhere I went I was worrying over it. But I’m not obsessing anymore! I am happy!” St. Paul, in his letter to the Galatians, wrote, “For freedom Christ set us free, so stand firm and do not submit again to the yoke of slavery.” Anthony, like the little starfish, had been set free. Praise God. Please pray for him as he continues on his journey with the Lord.

- Catherine Wurts, June 2014

* For example, Secular Pro-Life (SPL) is both strongly pro-life and explicitly atheistic. See JFA’s blog post featuring a list of links to SPL posts every pro-life advocate should read: www.jfaweb.org/secular-pro-life.

Aha Moments for Henry

Impact Report, May 2024

In this Impact Report, we feature a reflection from JFA trainer Andrea Thenhaus along with pictures of JFA trainers and volunteers at recent outreach events.  In early April, Andrea had a memorable conversation with Henry at Grand Valley State University near Grand Rapids, Michigan.  Although many people with whom we interact on campus don’t reveal their inner thought processes, Henry was kind enough to give Andrea a glimpse of how the conversation was changing him.  Aha moments are a joy to witness, but whatever the results seem on the surface, we thank God for helping us speak for those who cannot speak for themselves (Proverbs 31:8).  We thank God for you and for your partnership as we seek to be faithful in each conversation.

-Steve Wagner, Executive Director

 

Andrea (center) and volunteer Kalen (left) at Adams State University in Colorado (April)

Our team was nearing the end of our second day of outreach at Grand Valley State University. While the team started taking everything down, I remained available for conversations.

About this time, a student I’ll call “Henry” walked by our exhibit. I asked him if he had time to share his thoughts on the issue of abortion.

Henry replied that he was on his way to class and could not talk. Then a minute later, he turned around and said, “Actually, I have a few minutes to talk.” Our conversation went something like this:

Andrea: Okay, awesome. Do you think abortion should be legal or illegal?

Henry: I think it should be legal mainly for cases like rape, health of the baby, and life of the mother.

Andrea: Those are all hard cases for sure. Rape is such a horrific thing. Even if the woman does not get pregnant, it is still a traumatic experience. Then if the woman gets pregnant, things get even more complicated.

Kaitlyn (sitting), Kristina (center), and Seth (right) at University of Cincinnati (March)

Rather than jumping right into challenging Henry on his viewpoint, I was taking the time to slow down and show compassion for people who have been raped. Pro-choice and pro-life people all agree that rape is horrific, and it is helpful to find that common ground in our conversations. After spending a few minutes meeting the relational challenge inherent in discussing the topic of rape by acknowledging how difficult that situation is, I went on to intellectually respond to the questions he raised.

Andrea: For these specific circumstances that you mentioned, do you think abortions should be legal for all nine months of pregnancy or for a certain period of time?

Henry: Definitely a certain period of time. I believe the unborn are living human beings, so abortion should be legal for only the first trimester.

Andrea: Okay. Do you know anyone who has been affected by rape?

Henry: No, I do not. I just know it happens.

Andrea: Yeah, for sure. Here’s one way I look at it. Imagine there are two women who have been violated through rape. Both women have gotten pregnant. One of the women has given birth to her son. He is two months old now. The other woman is two months pregnant. If I asked you if both women have the right to kill their child, I think you would say no.

Henry: Right! Of course the woman with the two-month-old should not be able to kill her child.

Steve and volunteer Kim (right) at University of Arizona (February)

Andrea: I totally agree. If the unborn are human beings like the two-month-old, then we should protect the unborn even if they came about through rape, right?

Henry: You made a good point there! That makes sense. And why should the unborn be punished for the wrong that was committed?

Andrea: I agree.

Henry: Abortion should only be legal for the health of the baby and the life of the mother.

I addressed these issues, and by the end of the discussion, Henry responded:

Henry: Wow! Those are good points. This has given me a lot to think about.

Before Henry left for class, he thanked me for the conversation. I could tell that God was working in his life. Henry realized that since the unborn are living human beings, they should be protected even if they may not live very long or if they were conceived through rape.

Our trainers and volunteers often have opportunities to gently challenge pro-choice students and point out the inconsistencies in their views by asking them questions that help them think through the issue themselves. Thank you for your prayers and support that allow us to have conversations with students like Henry.


"I'd Rather Be Aborted."

I saw this sticker on an electrical box near Planned Parenthood when I was sidewalk counseling.

“I’d rather be aborted.” “I wish I was aborted.” I’ve had people say things like this to me in conversations. I’ve seen the sentiment on a sticker on an electrical box outside Planned Parenthood and written on JFA’s Free Speech Board.

These kinds of statements demand a careful, compassionate response rather than a quick retort or an argument.

Sometimes I’ve heard pro-life people respond by saying something like, “Well, if you were aborted, you wouldn’t be here.” For many people, that was precisely the point they were trying to make: “I wish I was dead.”

For someone to say she’d rather be dead speaks to something much deeper that needs our attention. A person’s view on the killing of vulnerable human beings by abortion is important, and we do need to dismantle bad ideas and worldviews. It is equally important, though, to care for her personal life and experience.

A student wrote this on our Free Speech Board at Texas Woman’s University in March 2024

If a person can’t see her own value and would rather be dead, it’s likely she is going to have a difficult time understanding the incredible value an unborn child has. In my experience, most conversations about abortion aren’t purely intellectual. It’s not just about presenting good arguments for the equal rights of unborn human beings, as important as that is. It’s about so much more than this.

For those who may disagree with my response so far, I’d like to clarify that I’m not saying people must understand their own worth before they can see value in others. I think it’s possible for people to not see themselves as valuable and still respect and honor someone else’s right to life. What I am saying is that the fact that the person may not value her own life is an important piece of the conversation, and we shouldn’t ignore it.

The “I wish I had been aborted” statements could be coming from a suicidal place, but they could also be a way someone is trying to describe a painful part of her current experience. Pain and suffering wear on people and can lead them to use language that expresses a desire to die even if they may not literally mean that.

The personal, painful places in people’s lives often come up when I’m talking to people at universities across the country. While it can be challenging to deal with the emotional trauma people have, it’s good to understand those parts of people’s lives because those experiences matter. They inform how this person sees the world and how she views other people.

The truth is better understood and more easily received when people know we love them. Taking time to listen carefully to others and being slow to speak is a special gift we can extend to everyone.

Be willing to go slow with people. Listen to what they are saying. Listen to what they are not saying. Watch their body language and their expressions. Their stories and the reasons for their views are worth your time.

I think if we start with this relational approach with people, we will reach their hearts, and that in turn can make them more inclined to hear the intellectual arguments we will make. This can play a great part in influencing how they think about the value of their lives and the lives of unborn children. When we do this, I believe we will not only help people by helping bear their burdens, but we will also help foster a world that is safer for vulnerable human beings in the womb.

Once we take care to be relationally sensitive to the “I’d rather be aborted” statement, we need to focus on a question that is often overlooked in conversation: “What is the unborn?” That is a question that we must answer when discussing abortion because the whole issue largely hinges on how people answer that question.

People for and against legal abortion do not disagree that issues like poverty, abuse in foster care, not feeling ready for a child, and similar concerns are important. What we disagree about is how many people are involved in these situations. If abortion is not killing a human being like you and me, then only one human is involved, and abortion should be legal. But if the unborn is a human like you and me, then in every pregnancy we have more than one human being – the mother and the child – and both of them should be protected legally from violence.

Once we clarify this, I think it’s interesting to think about the “I’d rather be aborted” statement in terms of “forcing” a particular view of suffering on someone else since the result of abortion is a dead human being. Generally when people use the “forcing a view on someone else” language, it’s not accurate since “force” involves some kind of violence or threat of violence. Often people are accused of this when they are just having conversations and exchanging ideas in the public square. Having conversations isn’t violence. But abortion is violence. It ends the life of the unborn child. If one person says she’d rather be aborted, that view of life and suffering should not be forced on an innocent child via abortion.

One person may believe it’s better to die than to suffer. Maybe she wishes she had been aborted. It’s important to sympathize with her feelings of despair and not dismiss them. Since more than one human being is involved in pregnancy, though, we should also consider the rights and perspective of this other individual.

Maybe the unborn child will appreciate and be grateful for her life even in the midst of suffering. Maybe she will see her suffering as an opportunity to overcome and be stronger. We don’t know given that we cannot communicate with her. Yet. So who are we to force a particular view of suffering (that it is worse to suffer than to live) on her by killing her before she even gets a chance to express what her will and desires are?

If we can clarify that the unborn child is human like you and me, then it doesn’t make sense to use future suffering of the child or our own current suffering to justify killing her. What makes us think that we have the right to look at someone else’s life, judge how much she might suffer, and then kill her so she doesn’t have to go through the suffering? Someone else should not be given the power to look at your life and end it based on her beliefs about your future suffering and the best way to address suffering. In the same way, we cannot and should not make that call for someone else’s life


Only Two Questions?

Alan Shlemon has been one of my closest friends since the late 1990s, but after all these years, his answer surprised me. Late last year, our outreach team was about to sit down to dinner in his home, and I asked a version of this question: “What’s the minimum amount of training you think someone needs in order to have a successful conversation on a difficult topic?”

Alan Shlemon of Stand to Reason (right) interacts with a student at JFA’s “Stop and Think” outreach at UCLA in May 2016. Although we don’t know everything Alan was covering in this conversation, we do know for certain he was employing the two questions what and why and modeling the approach we discuss in this post.

Alan is a speaker at Stand to Reason (www.str.org), and like the trainers at Justice For All (JFA), he regularly equips Christians to talk about the most thorny and complicated topics in the culture. I expected Alan to say something like “four or five hours” since just one topic can bring up a myriad of facts, questions, and arguments, let alone all of the related topics people inevitably also raise.

Instead, Alan said he really only needed just a few minutes to teach people to use the Columbo Tactic. He was referring to asking questions that gather information and request reasons. (STR’s Greg Koukl named this tactic after the beloved, bumbling 1970’s detective who solved his crimes by asking questions.) That was it? All people need is to learn to ask a couple of questions?

I quickly realized, though, that Alan was simply reminding me of what I and other JFA trainers have been teaching for years: “Learn to ask two questions, and you can make an impact in any conversation on any topic with anyone anytime anywhere.” What two questions? The same ones to which Alan was referring: what and why. These questions help us gather information (What do you believe? What did you mean by that?) and ask people to give reasons for the claims they make (Why do you believe that? How did you come to that conclusion?). These two questions also “get us out of the hot seat and into the driver’s seat of the conversation,” as Greg Koukl has often said.

Now, I don’t mean you can ask these questions in any way and expect them to create productive dialogue. Obviously, we need to follow these questions up with “listening to understand.” We’ve also found that accompanying these questions with a desire to find common ground (“I agree… I think you’re making a good point”) and an attitude of humility (“I know I’m mistaken about some things, and you might have insight that will shed light on which of my beliefs are false”) helps the two questions make their impact. In this way you can also create a context in which the person is more likely to be open to a third type of question that challenges his or her beliefs.

So, if you’re afraid to engage friends or family in conversation about difficult topics, I suggest you focus on developing your ability to ask these two questions, what and why. How? Start practicing. What’s great about these questions is that you don’t have to do the heavy lifting. You only have to figure out what words need to be clarified and what parts of the person’s view are unclear (ask some question that begins with “what did you mean…?”). Then once you have the person’s view clarified, you can think of her view like the roof of a house. What does a roof need in order to be a roof? Walls. So you then ask the person to build walls that support her roof (ask some question that begins with “why do you believe…?” or “how did you come to this conclusion?”).

You can even practice this approach and these questions on topics that don’t have to do with controversial issues; I’m referring to the conversations you have with the people closest to you that become tense and frequently devolve into hurt feelings. Instead of assuming you know what your spouse or child or friend meant, ask “what did you mean when you said…?” Instead of assuming you know how she would support her view, ask “what reasons for this view are persuasive to you?”

I’m confident you’ll find that you can create productive conversations you never thought possible. In fact, people frequently report to our team during our campus events things like, “This was the best conversation I’ve ever had.” Sure, members of the JFA team have a lot of experience, and I consider them experts. But even someone with no experience, a conversation beginner, can experience the same extraordinary results. You can start today to develop these skills. Just focus on asking these two questions!

Thank you for partnering with us as we help pro-life advocates and Christians get started changing hearts and minds with simple tools like these.

Note: This letter is the third 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 the previous letters in the series:

See Other Letters in this Series

Should We Flip-Flop When Someone Flips Out?

JFA trainer Kristina Massa was surprised when an angry young woman lashed out at a poll table sign at our outreach event at Boise State in the fall. She was even more surprised at the conversation that followed. Through her retelling in a recent letter, “Flipping Tables in the Courtyard” (enclosed, or see www.jfaweb.org/jan-2024), Kristina provides a great model for deciding “what to say when,” and she illustrates the sort of balanced approach all JFA trainers aim to exhibit in every conversation. Please read her letter, and then I’ll explain.

Note how Kristina doesn’t shy away from the young woman’s question about homosexuality and marriage. You might think this would lead to a distraction from the main topic. While controversial questions can be a distraction in some abortion conversations, in this instance addressing the topic turned out to be helpful.

Kristina answered the young woman’s questions directly and honestly, giving her the benefit of the doubt that she was asking in good faith and not intending to trap. Kristina didn’t try to hide her views on sexuality and marriage, even though she knew they were very controversial. She didn’t go weak-kneed or change her views because this woman had flipped out by “flipping tables” (her words). Instead, Kristina gave a straightforward answer with a reasonable explanation, and she also avoided expressing her views in an unnecessarily harsh way.

Then Kristina prayed with the young woman, banking on the fact that they shared similar backgrounds in Christian communities. Rather than focusing on the differences she definitely had with this woman regarding beliefs about God, Jesus, and how we should live, Kristina focused on the small sliver of common ground that this woman had implied earlier, that she did consider herself to be following Jesus.

With many people who vehemently disagree with us on difficult topics, we have found this approach to be disarming and bridge-building. In this case, I am guessing that this woman appreciated the fact that Kristina showed interest in a passion of hers. I believe the woman also felt dignified by Kristina’s decision to trust her with what she really thought.

Conversations with Helen and Lisa

Thank you for supporting JFA’s work this year. We’ve been especially encouraged by the efforts of our fall 2023 interns, Seth and Catherine. In this Impact Report, you’ll read first-hand accounts of their conversations with “Helen” and “Lisa.” You can see both interns in action in the banner image and at the end of this post. Catherine will continue to volunteer with JFA in the coming months, and Seth is now raising support to work full-time as a Training Specialist. We thank God for these talented pro-life advocates, and we thank God for your partnership that has helped them make an impact.

You can still give a year-end gift at www.jfaweb.org/donate, or you can give a year-end gift by mail using the enclosed giving form and envelope. To receive a 2023 donation receipt, make sure gifts are submitted online or postmarked by December 31, 2023. Merry Christmas!

-Steve Wagner

IF WE HAD NOT GONE…

By Catherine Gimino, Fall 2023 Intern

“Helen” was unsure of her words, not just because we had interrupted her morning walk to class with an unexpected survey on abortion, but also because she was a foreign exchange student and new to speaking English. Despite this added difficulty with an already culturally-loaded topic, she was very willing to talk. I began by asking her questions to understand her view on abortion. Her view was that the unborn is not human until birth and so abortion at any stage is acceptable.

I walked her through what biology teaches us about the unborn, showing her that they are human beings starting at fertilization. I used Trot Out The Toddler and the Equal Rights Argument, tools taught by JFA to keep the conversation focused and to show that the unborn are human beings with an equal right to life. My attempts to clearly lay out the arguments were far from perfect. Despite feeling discouraged by my lack of eloquence, I kept going.

I eventually asked my coworker Kristina to jump in. She asked Helen, “Based off of what you’ve heard, do you think differently about abortion?” Helen responded saying that abortion should be illegal through all nine months and that she would support pro-life laws!

After Helen left, we debriefed the conversation. I told Kristina that I thought I could have explained things more clearly, but Kristina refocused me on the big picture: “That was a total mind change! By talking to you she went from thinking all abortion is okay to being against abortion. That is really awesome!” Then I realized something. If we had not gone out to WSU and asked Helen to participate in a JFA survey, her usual walk to class would have remained uninterrupted, and she would not have learned the truth about abortion that morning.

I trust God will bring a lot of fruit from this “interruption.”

A Conversation at Mankato

By Seth Wiesner, Fall 2023 Intern

In October I was doing outreach with the JFA team at Minnesota State University in Mankato. I started a conversation with a young woman named “Lisa.” She quickly became angry and began raising her voice. Suddenly she exclaimed, “I wish I had been aborted!”

Sensing that this issue was very personal to her, I took a step back from the questions I typically ask in order to challenge a person’s view. Instead I simply asked questions to try to understand her perspective. Asking questions about her beliefs not only helped me understand her position, but also demonstrated my care for her as a person. It gave me the opportunity to learn about her background, and this helped me discover the unspoken reasons that influenced her position.

Using this approach, we discussed her views on many different topics including the resurrection of Jesus. By the end of our conversation, she had softened her demeanor and her pro-choice views considerably. She accepted JFA’s “Invitation to Dialogue” brochure when I offered it to her and told me she was open to being pro-life. Thanks be to God. (See www.jfaweb.org/brochure to view and download the brochure.)

There is a great need for people to understand the truth about abortion. There are many out there, especially young adults, who haven’t been taught well and need someone to help them see how appalling abortion is. My conversation with Lisa is an example of how asking questions with an open heart and listening to understand can change the course of a conversation and lead people closer to the truth.

One Person Can Change the World

Train One to Reach One, then Pray for Each One

In my October letter, I asked readers to make a monthly pledge, recommend JFA to a friend, and commit to pray for JFA. Read or share this important letter.

In this Impact Report, we share names and pictures of some of the people with whom our team interacted in 2023. Would you post this list somewhere in your home and pray that God will help each of these people to love the unborn, hate elective abortion, and accept God’s love?

To view more pictures and read recent stories of conversations, see our blog.

As you consider your year-end giving, would you make a special gift to JFA to help our team train many more Christians to reach the people God puts in their path? Thank you!


Pray with us for…



Because One Person Can Change the World

There are four senses in which “one person can change the world.” Ultimately, we believe Jesus Christ is the one Person who changes the world for the better. This is why we exist and why we train Christians to depend on Christ to make change. In addition, each person trained, each life saved, and each person listed below also represents one person who can change the world, by God’s power. Each person is worthy of respect and protection and investment, even if he or she may never change the world in a positive way. It is true, though, that each person JFA reaches could play a pivotal role in changing the world for the better. We thank God that we can partner with you in training Christians to reach one person at a time.

Will You Partner with Us through a Monthly Pledge?

October 2023 Letter from the Executive Director

Students at the University of Northern Colorado (UNC) recently invited Justice For All (JFA) to help them reach their campus. Madelyn Biggers, the president of the club, reflected on the event:

“Partnering with JFA was a great experience for the UNC Students for Life… The seminar was very informative and the best pro-life training I’ve ever attended… The instructors were knowledgeable and compassionate. Tabling on campus was a great learning experience, and we definitely got a lot of people talking about abortion. I would love to host JFA again in the future!”

Madelyn’s experience is just one example of how God is using the JFA team to train Christians, nurture leaders, and get people thinking clearly about abortion. Our paid internship program is another (see our fall interns, Seth and Catherine, below).

To train more people, the JFA team has been at work in nine states this fall, including three universities new to JFA*. See recent stories of changed minds and hearts below, and see pictures from recent events at www.instagram.com/picturejusticeforall.

Interns Catherine Gimino (left) and Seth Wiesner (left of center) interact with UNC students.

To continue to invest in leaders like Madelyn, Seth, and Catherine, we need your help. Each of our trainers raises personal support, and their travel, food, laptop, and other essentials are covered by our other giving designations. Each of our trainers and programs needs prayer and increased support, so now is a great time to partner with us. (Learn more about our current needs at www.jfaweb.org/invest.)

Will you make a monthly pledge of financial support or commit to increasing your support? (Set up a recurring bank transaction or credit card transaction at our Donate page. Or, call the number below.)

If you are already giving at the level you can, thank you. You are so important to our team! Would you pass this letter on to one friend with your recommendation that JFA is worthy of support?

Are you unable to give at this time? Please commit to pray for a team member or the entire team.

Use the enclosed form or go to the JFA Donate page to make a commitment to pray or give. Or, you can call our office (316.683.6426) so that our wonderful office manager, Eva Heath, can assist you.


Recent Stories of Changed Hearts and Minds


Click here to see recent outreach events at Instagram


Recent and Upcoming Outreach Events

Note: Interactive workshops preceded all events listed below.

8/28-30 * Boise State University (ID)

9/18-20 University of Northern Colorado (CO)

10/2-3 * Minnesota State Univ. Mankato (MN)

10/9-11 CSU San Marcos & Palomar College (CA)

10/18 * Christopher Newport University (VA)

10/30 University of Central Oklahoma (OK)

10/31-11/1 University of North Texas (TX)

11/13-15 University of Texas at Austin (TX)

Be Relational...then Be Intellectual

In my May letter, I shared the story of my conversation with Stacey at Palomar College. It began with her saying abortion should be legal through all nine months of pregnancy because of bodily rights, and it ended with her saying, “I’ve never thought about whether the fetus is a person before. I’ll have to think about that.” This conversation illustrates a simple approach: Be relational, then be intellectual. What began as a principle we applied to the question of rape is now a principle we apply to every question related to pregnancy and abortion. You can see another great model of the basics of this approach in last month’s Impact Report by Kristina Massa entitled, “Answering the Hard Cases.”

I want to share a bit of the history of how this concept became so central to our teaching at JFA. A good starting point is a scene seven minutes into the documentary Unborn in the USA (2007), which was filmed about 19 years ago at Focus on the Family Institute (photo below). After watching that scene, a writer from Nerve Magazine (an edgy online magazine that is not recommended reading) said,

The guy is making perfect sense…He's an articulate, intelligent, calm presence. Suddenly, a chill creeps up your spine: I hope there are people on the pro-choice side who are equally perceptive and balanced.

I was the featured speaker in that scene, and here’s essentially what I was teaching: When talking about the topic of rape, we need to show sympathy for the rape victim and show emotional sensitivity to the heaviness of the topic of rape and the horror of that evil act. We need to do these things first, before making intellectual arguments. I regularly tell audiences that part of my job is to help them recover their common sense as a guide for how to respond to difficult questions like the question of abortion in the case of rape. We should be the strongest advocates for women whose basic rights have been trampled. In fact, the same concern for human rights that animates us to stand up for unborn children also animates us to stand up for all women everywhere and for their very real bodily right to be free from rape.

Focus on the Family Institute (Sept. 2004): During interactive role-play activities, Steve sometimes stood on a chair to make a point.

Being relational first and then giving intellectually credible answers to hard questions is practically wise: it works. It’s the best way to help people be open to our perspective. There’s a more fundamental reason to use this approach, though: it’s the right thing to do. Because all human beings have intrinsic value, we should stand up for them and show concern for them.

At first, we emphasized “being relational and then being intellectual” mostly on the topic of rape. Some of our trainers, notably Tammy Cook, have argued for years, though, that this approach is valuable on a much broader spectrum of questions related to pregnancy and abortion. In 2018 I put some of this approach into words in a series called “It’s Her Body.” I made the case that the relational concerns that are on the minds of people discussing the question of rape are just as present when a woman’s body is mentioned. I pointed out that many pro-choice advocates perceive or feel our advocacy against abortion to be a violation of a woman's body. If they hear our advocacy this way, the fear and horror they feel for other violations of a woman’s body will obstruct hearing our case for the unborn’s value.

To meet this challenge, I claimed that for any bodily rights argument, we should also use the approach of “be relational and then be intellectual.” First, point out that women have real bodily rights, generally speaking, and those rights have been trampled throughout history up to the present day in horrific acts including rape, domestic violence, and slavery. Then clarify how far those bodily rights extend and how it changes things when we consider that since those bodily rights are fundamental, they must have begun when the human being began, at fertilization. If the unborn also has bodily rights, their bodily rights should be respected as well. Be relational, then be intellectual.

The more we as a community have reflected on these things, we’ve realized that this is a good practice to follow with every pro-choice argument. Show sensitivity to the emotional heaviness caused by the suffering in these circumstances, then continue in that relational sensitivity as you offer intellectual clarifications.

Here’s an example: If someone says, “some women are too poor,” I begin with relational and emotional sensitivity: “That’s a good point. Some women are very poor, and I can’t fully understand what it’s like to be poor and pregnant. I’m glad you’ve brought this up, and I don’t have a simple answer.” When it seems helpful, I can then clarify that because poverty isn’t a good justification for killing a toddler whose mom is poor, this justification for abortion only works if something else is also true, that the unborn is not a human being. This clarifies that we all need to focus on this central question. We agree poverty is incredibly difficult, and we agree we need to care for poor women. What constitutes good “care” will depend on our answer to the question, “How many people are in the room?” If there’s only one person present when a woman is pregnant, and abortion kills no one, then abortion should be legal. But if abortion kills a real human being, it would be odd to offer abortion as a solution to poverty. Our approach is the same for most other justifications for abortion, including “the child will suffer,” “a woman’s life will be overturned by caring for a child,” and “the world is overpopulated such that people can’t get enough to eat.” We show concern for the suffering involved (“be relational”) and then clarify the truth that these situations don’t justify killing human beings, including the unborn (be intellectual).

Oct. 2024 Update: Note that this letter expands on the second of a series of three letters Steve wrote from February 2023 until March 2024 - letters focused on conversations skills we teach volunteers that help them get started having conversations and encourage them to stay active. Here are links to the series, including this letter, so you can see how it fits in the flow of thought:

  1. “Be a Playmaker” (Feb. 2023) on the importance of seeing your advocacy in

  2. “Thinking about the Unborn Child for the First Time” (May 2023) on being relational then intellectual

  3. “Only Two Questions?” (March 2024) on the two clarification questions that can help you make an impact in any conversation.

Answering the Hard Cases

August 2023 Impact Report

In almost every conversation about abortion, we can expect people to ask about “hard cases” such as rape, incest, and life-threatening pregnancy complications. In this Impact Report, JFA trainer Kristina Massa beautifully illustrates JFA’s framework for addressing these questions. Through the story of a conversation from our April 2023 outreach at Colorado State University (CSU), Kristina describes step by step how she began with relational sensitivity and continued in that mode while also offering intellectually satisfying answers. Thank you for partnering with us so we can train more Christians and pro-life advocates to use this framework. It gives our strong case against elective abortion the best chance of being considered by skeptical listeners.

Steve Wagner, Executive Director

I watched “Brad” have his first “aha” moment within a few minutes of starting our conversation. My team was set up at Colorado State University in the middle of the campus’s main plaza when I found Brad standing by the free speech board. He was staring pensively at the comments. “Do you have any thoughts on abortion?” I asked. He answered that since the unborn are not conscious, they do not have the same rights as born humans. To make sure I understood his view, I asked a few more questions and found common ground with him where I could. Eventually I felt like I had built enough rapport with him to challenge his perspective. Here is the gist of what followed:

Kristina: I agree there are many differences between the unborn and us. There are also many differences between you and me. I think the question we need to answer is whether these differences matter. For example, you have dark skin, I have light skin. You are taller than me, I have longer hair than you. I am older than you, you are probably smarter than me. It seems like in order to demand we should be treated equally, there has to be something the same or equal about us; something that adults and infants have, but animals do not. Since animals are also conscious, it seems like the quality that grounds our equal rights must be more fundamental.

Kristina (right) talks to students at JFA’s Fort Lewis College outreach event in Durango, Colorado in April 2022.

That was when he had his first “aha” moment.

Brad: We’re all human beings.

Intellectually, he understood the pro-life position. Emotionally, there was still one roadblock hindering him from agreeing with it.

Brad: But what if a woman was raped? My mom was raped and became pregnant with my older sister. Do you think women should have a choice in a situation like that?

Here’s a close up of the free speech board at the CSU outreach. It’s a concept we’ve been testing recently.

Brad asked me a yes or no question, but I was not going to give him a quick yes or no response. The scenario was personal to him, and I needed to meet him relationally before I could give him my answer.

Kristina: I am so sorry your mom went through that. Rape is one of the most heinous crimes. How is she doing now?

Brad: Yeah, it was really hard on her. Thankfully she was already married to my dad, and he was very supportive of her through it. He told her that he would help her take care of my sister.

Rather than immediately answering his question, I slowed the conversation down by expressing concern for his mother. I focused on meeting what we at JFA call “the relational challenge.” This answers the question, “What about the woman? Do pro-life people think the lives of women who have been raped matter?” After all, the woman we were discussing was not an abstract hypothetical character. For Brad, she was his mother.

Still, Brad wanted to know my answer to “the intellectual challenge:” Is abortion justified if the woman was raped? Should it be legal? To answer this, I used the dialogue tool Trot Out the Toddler. It went something like this:

Kristina: Can I share a scenario with you that’s related to your question?

Brad: Sure.

Kristina: Imagine a woman is raped, becomes pregnant, and gives birth to her baby. She’s hurting, and even looking at her baby overwhelms her with fear and pain because her child’s existence reminds her of her attack. This is a terrible and tragic scenario no one should ever have to face. But Brad, I am guessing you and I will agree on a few things about this situation: We both want this woman to heal. We also want her to have choices to go about her healing. But those choices are not unlimited. If she thought ending her infant’s life would be the most helpful way to heal her trauma, we would not let her go through with it. Would you say you share that conviction as well?

Brad: Yes, she cannot kill her baby. That’s a human being.

Kristina: I agree with you, and that is the significant thing. When we say she cannot kill her newborn, we are not saying, “I don’t care about your rape. I don’t care about your trauma. I don’t care about your child.” What we are saying is, “I care so much about you, and I want you to have choices. I just want you to have choices that will help both of you and don’t add violence to an already violent situation.” Since the unborn have a human nature like the infant in this circumstance, do you think it could make sense to protect the unborn in the same way we protect infants who were conceived in rape?

Brad paused to reflect. And then I watched him have his second “aha” moment.

Brad’s comment on the free speech board

Brad: I think you are right. Unborn human beings have the same basic rights we do, so they should be protected, too.

Then he walked back to the free speech board to write the following comment: “It comes down to how we value human life. As humans, we create criteria for what qualifies as a “human.” That is how I perceive the pinpoint of this argument. Perhaps if we come to an agreement for what is truly human, we could apply that criteria for everyone...”

Thank you for helping me make the abortion of all children – regardless of the circumstances that created them – unthinkable, one person at a time. In case no one has told you recently, your life matters, too!