Raw from the Fallout of Dobbs?

Towards the end of a recent Love3 online workshop, one participant I’ll call “Sabrina” startled me with these words: “Now I have to find a new place to live.”

Sabrina’s roommate had seen her support for the Dobbs decision on social media and said, “We need to talk.” She made it clear she no longer felt comfortable living with Sabrina, so Sabrina needed to move out.

My heart ached for Sabrina. What an unfortunate result of her reasonable rejoicing over a good Supreme Court decision! For those of us who share Sabrina’s support of Dobbs and strong opposition to legal abortion, it’s perhaps easy to sympathize with her pain of loss. This situation causes me also, though, to sympathize with Sabrina’s friend and others who are feeling so raw from the Dobbs decision that they’d be willing to lose friends over it. Many see abortion as a fundamental right and when it becomes clear that this “right” is not only no longer recognized by the Supreme Court but also not even recognized by those thought to be friends, it can be especially painful.

How should we respond to pro-life and pro-choice people in our acquaintance as they experience fallouts from the Dobbs opinion? One strategy some Christians are following is to simply avoid the topic of unwanted pregnancy and abortion altogether. If we follow this avoidance strategy, we aren’t really serving anyone – not the unborn, not the women and men struggling with past abortions who need to heal, not friends who need more conversation about spiritual topics, and not the Christians who have a special opportunity to make a difference right now.

Dobbs has provided perhaps the best opportunity of the past few decades to discuss unwanted pregnancy, abortion, and the intrinsic value of every human being. As our team embarks on a busy fall with a number of outreach events, I am looking forward to discovering if my hunch about Dobbs is correct. I suspect that the Supreme Court’s decision to return the abortion question to the states will motivate great numbers of people to engage in discussion for the first time.

Sure, if I’m right and people are ready to talk, and if I’m also right that many are sad, angry, and otherwise “raw” from the Dobbs opinion, the conversations will be difficult. But I’d much rather have a difficult conversation than no conversation at all. Getting meaningful conversations started with the millions of people who have been too apathetic to engage has been one of our chief struggles. If it’s true that they will now engage, we must not waste this moment when they are ready.

Think of the unborn children who have been getting the “raw end of the deal” for decades under the Roe and Casey regimes (and still under Dobbs in many, many states) when they are killed by abortion. Whether this reality leaves our emotions “raw” or not, how should we respond?

Instead of glibly flaunting the Dobbs opinion with a smug sense of victory, with no goal of dialogue, we should indeed start conversations, and we should begin with concern for the feelings of those who disagree. Then we should fearlessly offer reasons that compel any person who cares about human rights to include unborn children in their circle of concern. Instead of shrinking back, fearful of making a mistake, we should prepare our minds and hearts, then spend time praying for God’s help. With that foundation, we trust God to use each encounter, however complicated by emotions, for the good of each person and for the purposes of God’s kingdom.

We invite you to join us during our Love3 Workshops beginning September 15 (or at other events in your area – see below) to get equipped for this important task ahead of each of us.

Thank you for praying for us and partnering with us as we train Christians and other pro-life advocates to infuse these dark conversation spaces with the light of love and the light of truth.

Image by Andraz Lazic on Unsplash

---

Recent Articles and Posts by JFA Trainers

Recent Instagram post @picturejusticeforall

To Christians Upset About Roe’s Reversal – R. Dyer

What Now? – J. Gorr

Roe v. Wade Overturned – JFA Team

Attitude Can Make or Break... – R. Hotovy

Two Buckets, Take 2 – T. Cook

Question Helps Change a Mind – J. Bai

---

Recent and Upcoming Events—Fall 2022

8/27 Seminar (Wichita, KS)

8/29-30 Outreach at Wichita State (KS)

9/4 Presentation (Canton, OH)

9/8 Workshop (Denver, CO)

9/10 Seminar (Windsor, CO)

9/11 Seminar (Fort Collins, CO)

9/12-14 Outreach, Colorado State (Fort Collins, CO)

9/15 Love3 Workshops Begin (Online)

9/17 Seminar (Rogers, AR)

9/18 Seminar (Bentonville, AR)

9/18 Workshop (Ogallala, NE)

9/25 Workshop (Owosso, MI)

October Workshops in DC, TX, OH

October Outreach in DC, TX, OH

November Workshops and Outreach in TX

Jan. 2023 Workshops and Outreach in CA

To Christians Upset About Roe's Reversal

There have been claims made by some in the Christian community that Roe being overturned is a distraction from the real issues at hand. There have been Christians lamenting the reversal. It’s been said that focusing on laws and overturning court cases is not the answer to reducing or eliminating abortion. A host of other social issues are presented with the claim that caring for human beings means we need to focus on basically every other issue except making laws that protect unborn children from violence. Hearing this come from people who call themselves Christians is disheartening. 

Of course there are many other issues to care about. Of course women and their circumstances matter and merit our attention and concern. Pro-life advocates’ concerns are not just about making abortion illegal, though that is a crucial part of this issue. We understand there are other issues to solve. But working to protect innocent human beings from violence is not a distraction. It is a very worthy thing to focus on. 

Go to Human Defense Initiative to read the full article.

What Now?

What is next after the Supreme Court's ruling in Dobbs? I have been trying to come up with a concise way of thinking about that for the last month or so. Recently on a podcast I heard Henry Olsen, a Washington Post opinion columnist and polling expert, give the following post-Dobbs action plan which I think best expresses my thoughts:

“Overturning Roe, in hindsight, will be seen as the easy part. And I know that sounds like an absurd thing to say, since it took us almost 50 years to overturn Roe. But the fact is that the majority of American public opinion says that life within the womb in the first trimester (when the vast majority of abortions occur) does not deserve legal protection. They do not see the unborn child at that stage as sufficiently human to demand protection of the law. That opinion can change, it was different 60 years or 70 years ago, but that’s the battle that pro-lifer’s need to fight.

Jeremy Gorr in conversation with some students at UCLA in May, 2022.

“We can eliminate abortion extensively throughout the nation only when we change public opinion in that way. That’s the real battle, changing public opinion about the legal status and the human status of the unborn child in the first trimester. When we win that battle, we will win nationwide. Until we win that battle, it will always be a case of carving out enclaves and doing what we can.”

(“Life After Dobbs,” Episode 9, 33:58)

We convinced five judges, now we must convince 300 million Americans.

Roe v. Wade Overturned

On June 24 when the Supreme Court of the United States handed down its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the Court made a significant correction and a step toward justice.

This case centered around a 2018 Mississippi law that banned abortions after 15 weeks. The law sparked litigation that challenged the constitutionality of such a ban because Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey claimed abortion was a constitutional right well beyond 15 weeks. After hearing the Dobbs case in December 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 upholding Mississippi’s abortion law, and ruled 5-4 to strike down Roe and Casey.

Justice Alito wrote the majority opinion and said,

“We therefore hold that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion. Roe and Casey must be overruled, and the authority to regulate abortion must be returned to the people and their elected representatives.” (Dobbs, p. 69)

On June 25 the Wall Street Journal Weekend Edition captured these powerful photographs showing the division on this topic.

As we look back on the past 49 years with Roe in place, we are thankful that our nation finally recognized that the Roe decision was egregious and faulty. Overturning Roe was a significant step toward a more just society.

While it is worthwhile to take some time to reflect and celebrate, that time is short. We need to double down and focus on reaching our communities with the message that every human being, born and unborn, deserves equal protection from violence. We need to focus on serving families in our communities, especially women in need that are all alone in raising their children.

It’s as important as ever to actively, boldly, and faithfully engage our college campuses and wider culture with truth. We are gearing up for the fall semester. Our travels will take us across the country to talk with students and many others about the grave evil of abortion and the great value of unborn children. As we engage, we will continue to eagerly love babies, mothers, and those with whom we disagree.

“Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity. Your speech must always be with grace, as though seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should respond to each person.
”

— Colossians 4:5-6

Colossians 4:5-6 holds much wisdom for us in this time. We need to use great care in how we talk to each person about Roe and the state of abortion in this country. Many people are celebrating. Many others are grieving. People with different experiences and backgrounds require a careful approach that is gentle, compassionate, and truthful. We need to dig deeper to discover underlying issues that form people’s views on abortion. May we be quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to anger (James 1:19-20) so that people feel safe to transform their views about unborn human beings.

We are grateful for every person who has taken time to get trained to communicate well about abortion. We are also grateful for every person that has taken time to reach out to someone to have a conversation about abortion even when it has been uncomfortable.

The Justice For All team is excited to train and impact many more pro-life advocates during this critical time in history. We are deeply committed to training these advocates to speak the truth in love and treat each person we meet with gentleness and respect. This will create a world that is more just and more safe for every human being. We expect the Dobbs decision to save many lives. There are, however, many more lives that can only be saved when abortion becomes truly unthinkable for more people in our country. These efforts continue to be Justice For All’s main focus.

By training individual advocates and connecting personally with those who disagree, Justice For All has been focused on planting tens of thousands of seeds throughout our nation. We fully trust that God will continue to nourish and grow those seeds into something beautiful. Thank you for standing with us in this important movement and for your part in making this work possible.

Sincerely,

The Justice For All Staff

Attitude Can Make or Break the Conversation

Recently, veteran JFA trainer Rebecca Hotovy found an unsent email in her drafts folder. It contained a nearly complete newsletter detailing a conversation from years back. I was so taken with it, I wanted to share it with you. (Rebecca still coaches other JFA speakers part-time during brief breaks from her full-time job as mom to two precious boys.)

We know this story definitely happened at the University of Oklahoma, and we think it happened around 2015. Whatever the date, the story beautifully illustrates the power of JFA’s dialogue approach, the power of a few carefully crafted questions asked with an open heart, and the way in which our attitude has the power to make or break a conversation. - Steve Wagner, Executive Director

---

Impact Report, June 2022

Rebecca Hotovy, JFA Trainer Certification Coach and Trainer Emeritus

 Several years ago at the University of Oklahoma (OU), as I stood next to the large exhibit, a young man approached me. I’ll call him Chris. Confident that abortion was a woman’s right, Chris started to explain why he felt abortion should remain legal. Several feet from me stood another man, likely twenty to thirty years older than Chris. Although this older man was not a volunteer with Justice For All, he held a pro-life view. He was close enough to hear my conversation with Chris, and as the conversation continued, he listened in.

View fullsize

Rebecca (center) interacts with an OU student in 2015 near a small version of the JFA Exhibit.

In the first few minutes of that discussion, I took time to figure out the reasoning behind Chris’s belief that abortion should remain legal. Without first understanding why Chris held his view or how he came to the conclusion that abortion should remain legal, I knew I wouldn’t be able help him see errors in his reasoning. I was also aware that blatantly pointing out any errors may upset him enough that he would end the conversation. If he didn’t end the conversation but he stayed and continued talking, it would likely make him put up barriers of self-defense that would prevent him from wanting to listen to the ideas being presented, even if he was physically present and talking. Sadly, I’ve seen this happen many times – two people begin to dialogue about a controversial subject, quickly start defending their own positions, and turn a conversation into two monologues because they feel offended. If they feel offended for whatever reason, they may hear words coming from the other person’s mouth, but they don’t listen to the meaning of the message of those words.

In my conversation with Chris, over time it became clear that he did not believe the unborn was biologically human. When I felt I had built a good rapport with him, I allowed our conversation to take a turn. I started asking questions not just to discover his reasoning in defense of legal abortion but also to challenge that reasoning. At this point in the conversation I knew he would welcome the challenge because he could see that I didn’t desire to push my agenda down his throat. The challenge questions I asked were exactly the ones we train participants to ask when they attend the Abortion: From Debate to Dialogue seminar. I said something like:

Rebecca: Chris, do you mean that you don’t believe the unborn is biologically a human being or that the unborn isn’t a human being that deserves the same rights as you and I do?

Chris: Oh, it’s not biologically a human being at all. It’s just a clump of cells in those early stages.

Rebecca: If I could offer evidence for why the unborn is a human being, would you mind?

Chris: Sure. Go ahead.

Rebecca: If the unborn is growing, isn’t it alive?

Chris: [pausing and then slowly nodding his head] Yeah, sure I can agree with that.

Rebecca: If the unborn has human parents, isn’t it human?

Chris: [pausing and pondering the question with a slight grin on his face] Yes.

It was his answer to my third question, though, that threw me for a loop.

Rebecca: And living human beings, like you and me, are valuable, aren’t they?

Chris: Oh my gosh. Yes.

There was another moment of silence as he continued to ponder the questions I had just asked that laid out a defense for the humanity of the unborn. We stood in silence for a while longer. Then he said something like:

Chris: Wow, okay, so I need to think through this more.

This was so unexpected to me because most students I talk to do not agree with each of these questions. They have all sorts of creative ideas to share, such as “Well, fire grows, and it’s not alive” or “Yeah, well a clump of cells might be alive and have human DNA, but that doesn’t mean it is a human being...Are tumors human beings?” or “Sperm are alive and have human DNA. Are all sperm valuable, too?”

Chris didn’t have any retorts like these. He simply agreed that the unborn was a human being.

Just as I thought the conversation was going really well, it took a turn for the worse. The pro-life man who had been listening in stepped close enough to us to join the conversation, turned to Chris, and snootily remarked, “She got ya! Didn’t she‽”

My heart dropped to my stomach. I had taken such care not to make Chris feel like I was attacking his position and to make him feel comfortable sharing his thoughts with me, and in less than three seconds someone who claimed to be pro-life obliterated all my efforts. Chris was as shocked as I was. His face showed it. He also became really nervous and started stumbling over his words.

One would think that I would easily become frustrated with people who hold beliefs against the dignity and sanctity of human life, but in this instance I became frustrated instead with this person who was like-minded to me in certain ways but didn’t realize the importance of treating the human standing in front of us with respect. Fortunately, I was able to jump back into the conversation, regain a good rapport with Chris, direct the conversation away from the “got ya” remark, and help him feel less nervous.

In hindsight, I now take another step back and realize that the art of learning to dialogue is a journey for everyone – the pro-life advocate and the pro-choice advocate alike. Prior to my training and work with Justice For All, if I had been that pro-life person standing there listening in on the conversation, I may have made a similar remark. Early on I didn’t understand that the way I shared the truth about the unborn could actually affect whether that truth helped pro-choice advocates change their minds. Thank you, Justice For All, for your gift of teaching me the beauty of dialoguing in love!

Note: Yes, that’s an intentional interrobang in the fourth from the last paragraph. Learn more about this controversial punctuation mark through this engaging podcast episode from 99 Percent Invisible.

Resources for Women, Men, and Their Families

RESOURCES

If you or someone you know is pregnant and needs support during and after pregnancy, here are resources for locating a center near you that can help. If you or someone you know is considering abortion or has had an abortion in the past, there are resources below that may help.  Or, call the JFA office (316-683-6426) and ask to speak with one of our trainers who can help you find resources in your area.

• Locating a pregnancy resource center and Federally Qualified Health Center

  • Option Line

  • Standing With You

  • Federally Qualified Health Centers

• Financial Aid for pregnant women

  • Let Them Live

• Other Resources for Reflecting and Processing

  • Abortion Changes You

  • Project Rachel

• Resources for Those Considering Abortion

  • "What is the unborn?"

  • "What is abortion?"

  • Abort73 Website

• Resource for reaching out to post-abortive women and men

  • Bridge to Healing

• Resources for Healing After Abortion

  • Rachel's Vineyard

  • Deeper Still

  • Testimonies of healing after abortion and the effects of abortion

Grant and the Gospel

“I don’t understand why I need to role-play,” Grant announced as I took my seat at the table.

About a year ago, my team and I traveled to San Antonio to facilitate a seminar for the pro-life club at University of Texas at San Antonio. During the last section of the seminar, we invited the participants to role-play a conversation on the topic of abortion with a JFA staff member.

It was at this point that Grant let me know he did not see any value in this exercise. I saw this as an opportunity to impart understanding. He informed me, “I will never have a conversation on this issue.” I encouraged him that it is important to be prepared to articulate his personal beliefs if someone asks him about abortion.

Grant then went on to share that he did not know where he stood on the issue of abortion. He had never thought about it prior to that day. The training material we presented was foreign information to him, including the images of the unborn in the different developmental stages. Grant also explained that he is not a confrontational person at all. If he is ever in a conversation where he disagrees with the other person, he stays quiet for fear that someone might ridicule him or make fun of his position.

I now began to understand where he was coming from. I naturally assume that most people who attend our seminars are pro-life. That is not always the case. As we talked that day, Grant did conclude that abortion is wrong.

Our conversation continued.

Andrea: I know you mentioned earlier that you have not thought through your position on the topic of abortion. You had a lot of information presented to you today. Since we agree that abortion is wrong, could we also agree that we need to stand up for the unborn? It would be as if your neighbor were abusing his child. Would you do something about it? Would you try to protect this child by calling social services?

Grant: Yes, of course.

Andrea: If someone came onto this campus and started shooting his gun, would you do what you could to stop the violence?

Grant: Yes, I would at least run for my life. I would also try to warn others and call the police.

Andrea: Exactly. Let’s imagine that your neighbor’s house was on fire at three in the morning. You would not think, “I do not want to offend my neighbor at this time of night.” No, you would warn your neighbor of the fire and do whatever it takes to get everyone out to safety. It’s the same with the unborn. I believe we should do what we can to stop this injustice.

Grant: That makes sense. I see where you are coming from.

We continued conversing on the topic for a few more minutes. For the most part, I asked questions and let him share his thoughts.

Andrea at UTSA Feb. 2022

He told me of his upbringing, how he was in foster care for three months and then adopted.

At this point, I knew role-playing a conversation was not what he needed. Grant had already sat through a four hour seminar.

I shifted our conversation to spiritual matters, and discovered he is currently searching. We had an extensive discussion in which I was able to share the hope of the gospel with him. He was actively engaged and seemed to be greatly impacted by our conversation.

Grant concluded, “I think it’s great to have conversations like this one. It is okay to disagree about certain topics, but still respectfully hear each other out. When I talk to my friends about issues that we may disagree on, they think we should just be done talking altogether. That is not how it should be. In our conversation, we had different views on things, but because you listened to me, I felt like I could actually share my opinion.”

The heart of JFA is to ask questions, listen, and find common ground whenever possible in every conversation. This approach can have a powerful impact in any conversation, not just when conversing about abortion. “People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.” (Theodore Roosevelt) We should never assume we know what someone believes. We must ask questions and listen, showing that we care about them. The impact can be profound. Even though Grant had different views than I do, he still felt like he could share his thoughts, and as a result was more open to listening.

Please join me in praying that God will continue to work in Grant’s life. Please also pray for us as we continue to talk to people like Grant.

The SCOTUS Leak

In early May, a leaked document from the Supreme Court showed that Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey could be officially overturned in June. In the leaked majority opinion draft of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Justice Alito says, “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled…”

If the official outcome is in fact that Roe and Casey are overturned, we will have made a huge step forward in protecting the equal rights of unborn human beings.

As good as this news is, it’s important to remember that overturning Roe and Casey will not make abortion illegal. It just returns the decision to the states. Some states will ban abortion. In others it will remain legal and easily accessible.

Supreme Court of the United States, Jan. 2022

Whatever the official outcome is, our job remains the same. We must continue to engage those around us in conversations. We still need to work to change hearts and minds about abortion. We need to help people see unborn children, not as burdens, but as fellow human beings with equal rights to you and me. We need to support and help pregnant women and their families. We need to engage those with whom we disagree in civility and open dialogue.

The news that Roe could well be on its deathbed is a frightening prospect to a lot of people. Many people are angry. They see this as a dangerous step backward in history. They see this development as an attack on women’s equality. Given the recent developments, there may be many people who are ready and open to having conversations who otherwise may not have been. What we say and how we say it matters. “Sweetness of speech increases persuasiveness.” (Proverbs 16:21b).

With this in mind, let’s engage those around us sharing truth with compassion, love, and patience. Let’s listen to their concerns, ask questions to understand where they are coming from, and find common ground with them whenever possible. May we use our conversations to come alongside people in humility, patience, and great love helping them recognize the humanity of our unborn brothers and sisters.

Two Buckets, Take 2

In our team debriefs recently, a number of our younger staff members have been remarking about a tool they picked up from Tammy Cook, who has been working at JFA since 1996. Tammy originally described her “Two Buckets” analogy in our September 2017 Impact Report (I encourage you to go back and read that story above). This Impact Report features a second “Two Buckets” installment from Tammy. She details a conversation that happened at Wichita State University in August, along with a summary of the impact of all of her conversations at that outreach event. - Steve Wagner, Executive Director

Impact Report, April 2022

By Tammy Cook, JFA Training Specialist

Tammy interacts with a student at Wichita State University in August 2021.

What a privilege it was to be back on the Wichita State University (WSU) campus on August 30 and 31 with the JFA team! I was excited to once again dialogue with college students face to face after a 17-month wait. I was ready to meet the challenge of helping them think through their views on abortion, and I prayed to see hearts and minds changed.

I introduced my Two Buckets analogy in 2017. It continues to be a very useful approach with pro-choice students that say, “I’m personally opposed to abortion, but I can’t tell others what to do.” I’m thrilled to share the impact that this analogy had on a WSU student named James.

James didn’t identify as pro-life or pro-choice. He said, “I’m in the middle.” I asked several questions to help him think through his views. I discovered that he believed that we become human at fertilization and that the unborn are human like us. He also agreed that the unborn deserved to be treated equally to born people and should be protected.

I then asked, “If you were to vote tomorrow on whether or not to keep abortion legal, how would you vote?” He thought long and hard and said, “I can still see both sides of the issue. I believe strongly in freedom of choice. I just don’t think I can take someone else’s rights away.” I shared my Two Buckets story to help him dig deeper into his thinking.

Tammy: Imagine that I have two buckets. The first bucket contains choices like murder, rape, stealing, and molestation. Do you agree that these choices are wrong and should not be legal?

James: Yes.

Tammy: The second bucket contains personal choices—for example, a favorite food like strawberries, choosing to go to college or not, dying your hair blue, etc. Do you agree that everyone should have the freedom to make these personal choices that do not harm others?

James: Yes.

Tammy: The significant difference between each of the two buckets is that one contains choices that harm people and the other bucket contains choices that do not harm people.

View fullsize

Two Buckets (Illustration by Joanna Bai)

James: That makes a lot of sense. Many people think pro-life people want to take rights away, but I can see now that you’re actually wanting to add rights to people— to let them have plenty of rights as long as it doesn’t harm another human being...

I smiled and nodded in agreement.

James: What about rape? That’s a really tough situation.

Tammy: I agree.

I spent some time empathizing with women who’ve been raped and stated that we should punish rapists more fully. He agreed, and I continued:

Tammy: There are most likely students walking on this campus that were conceived from rape. Do you think they are any less valuable than those students who were not conceived in rape?

James: No.

I could see that this was a lightbulb moment for him.

Tammy: So, in which bucket does abortion belong?

James: [after a short pause] Abortion belongs in the bucket with murder.

I again nodded in agreement. We smiled at each other. Then I returned to my earlier question:

Tammy: If you were to vote tomorrow on whether or not to keep abortion legal, how would you vote?

James: I’d definitely vote no!

This was such a great moment. I paused to thank God for using me as an instrument to help James have a change of heart so significant that he is now willing even to vote to protect the unborn.

---

Summary of My WSU Event Conversations

Tammy Cook

I saw God working in the hearts of many people. I had conversations with ten students over the course of two days at WSU (see one in the photo above). Here’s how I would categorize the students after asking a few questions to assess their views:

BEFORE: Undecided: 2 Pro-Choice: 5 Pro-Life: 3

I saw a complete shift in thinking by the end of the conversations with the two undecided students and two of the pro-choice students. All four said they would vote to make abortion illegal. I used the Two Buckets analogy in most of these conversations, and I believe it was integral in helping several of them, if not all, rethink their views.

AFTER: Undecided: 0 Pro-Choice: 3 Pro-Life: 7

---

Note: This story was originally published in Tammy Cook’s September 2021 newsletter. You can read and share both this and the first “Two Buckets” story using the following webpage: www.jfaweb.org/two-buckets.

One Central Question Helps Change a Mind

After serving at JFA for almost a decade, my sister Joanna Bai is moving on from her JFA work to focus completely on her growing family (she is due to give birth to another baby in March). Jon Wagner and I consider it a great gift and privilege to have been allowed to serve alongside our dear sister at JFA for so many years. The rest of the JFA team has expressed similar sentiments.

In this Impact Report we are featuring a conversation story Joanna shared in her March 2013 newsletter both because of the impact within the story itself, but also because it illustrates Joanna’s compelling teaching, her heart for mentoring, and her beautiful, clear writing – just a few of the many ways Joanna has impacted JFA’s team and mission. Please join us in thanking God for Joanna and enjoy with us this look back at His work through her. Thank you, Joanna! We will miss working with you! - Steve Wagner, Executive Director

Impact Report, March 2022

She started out defending abortion because of the plight of those in poverty. In just minutes, she said, “We really need to resolve the question of what the unborn is.” From there, I was able to help her find an answer. What caused the change?

I noticed “Jamie,” a confident young student at the University of North Texas, when she rode her bike up to the edge of the Justice For All Exhibit [Nov. 2012*]. It took me a few moments to decide if I would approach her. I’m so glad I did.

View fullsize

Joanna (right) interacts with a student at Arizona State in February 2013. Image: Cheryl Caffarella Wilson

View fullsize

Joanna (right) interacts with a student at Arizona State in February 2013. Image: Cheryl Caffarella Wilson

I asked Jamie what she thought about abortion. She told me openly, “Well, don’t get me wrong, I don’t like abortion. It just seems like difficult circumstances make it necessary. I’d say I’m pro-choice.”

“What sorts of circumstances are you concerned about the most?” I asked. She replied, “There are so many things. What about poverty? How can we force women who have no money and no resources to have kids? And how can we force those kids into such horrible lives?”

Jamie was raising an important point, but I knew that the fact of poverty itself wouldn’t help us discover whether abortion is a good solution to poverty. The conversation that followed illustrated perfectly one of the things we teach JFA volunteers: With abortion, there’s one central question we need to answer before moving on to other questions. I follow four steps to help people discover for themselves how central this question is. We call this process Trot Out a Toddler.*

Step 1: AGREE where possible.

Joanna: Jamie, I agree with you that many women have so little money and so few resources that it is difficult for them to be mothers. We need to be more concerned about those in poverty.

Step 2: APPLY the situation to a two-year-old.

Joanna: But Jamie, imagine a woman who is living in extreme poverty and who absolutely cannot rear a child. She doesn’t even have enough money to feed herself. Imagine that this woman has a two-year-old. Should she be able to kill that two-year-old because their lives are so difficult?

Jamie: Of course not. She cannot kill a two-year-old!

Joanna: I agree. Of course she cannot kill her two-year-old. And I know that question sounds a little odd on its face...

View fullsize

Joanna (left) interacts with students at Arizona State in February 2013. Image: Cheryl Caffarella Wilson

View fullsize

Joanna (right) interacts with students at Arizona State in February 2013. Image: Cheryl Caffarella Wilson

Step 3: ASK WHY the mother cannot kill the two-year-old.

Joanna: ...but let me ask you this: Why is it not okay to kill the two-year-old?

Jamie: Well, it’s not okay to kill the two-year-old because the two-year-old is a human being.

Step 4: AH! (The light-bulb moment: Discovering the central question, “What is the unborn?”)

Joanna: I agree. So it sounds like we don’t need to resolve the question of whether poverty matters. We agree that it certainly does. Rather, the question we need to resolve is, ‘What is the unborn?’ If the unborn is human like the two-year-old, then we can’t kill the unborn even because of poverty, right?

Jamie looked at me and I could tell she was thinking hard. She replied,

Jamie: That makes a lot of sense. I don’t know that much about when we become human, but it seems like that is the question we have to answer.

Most people will agree that abortion kills something, but whether or not we can kill a living thing depends first on what it is. Some pro-choice arguments address this question, “What is it?” and argue that the unborn is not a valuable human being. But others, like Jamie’s, ignore the unborn completely. Although arguments like hers raise important concerns, they assume that the unborn is not valuable. The four-step Trot Out a Toddler process helped Jamie realize that she needed to focus on the central question, “What is the unborn?”

Jamie and I continued our conversation for a few more minutes, discussing the evidence for the biological humanity of the unborn. We also discussed why we can have confidence that the unborn human has the same basic human rights that you and I have. Toward the end of the conversation, I was excited to see the progress we had made:

Jamie: You know, a lot of my friends are the ones protesting over there. [A number of pro-choice students had gathered with drums and signs to protest during the outreach.] But, I actually grew up in a Christian home, and my parents are pro-life. I don’t see eye to eye with my parents about a lot of things – for instance, I’m a lesbian – but I think I can agree with them about this issue. I think I can call myself pro-life now. I thought, by the way my friends talked, that you all were gonna shove anti-gay, anti-woman rhetoric at me. But I actually enjoyed this conversation. I really appreciate the way you all are creating dialogue.

I thanked her, and then she said something I’ll never forget:

Jamie: I have a lot of friends who have had abortions. And Joanna, you can see the change in them after the procedure. They carry an undeniable emptiness, as if they’ve truly lost a person.

And with that, she had to go to class.

Jamie’s barriers to being against abortion had been mainly social and cultural. She didn’t want to be identified with certain politically conservative views or certain “pro-life” people. The Trot Out a Toddler process was essential in our conversation because it helped her focus on the central question “What is the unborn?” Although this tool didn’t make the pro-life case for me, it helped Jamie and I agree about the question we needed to answer. It was just a short step from that point of agreement to Jamie’s moment of realizing that abortion is wrong because it kills a valuable human being.

* This story originally appeared in Joanna Bai’s March 2013 newsletter. See the links below to read other letters from Joanna. We owe the memorable phrase “Trot Out the Toddler” to Scott Klusendorf (prolifetraining.com) and the concept of “one central question” to Greg Koukl (str.org).

---

Joanna Bai: Selected Newsletters

Want to Make a Moral Impact? Help People Stop and Engage.

View fullsize

As our team joined me in Washington, DC last month for the March for Life and the National Pro-Life Summit conference, we were looking for ways to make a moral impact rather than to make just a moral statement (see my January letter for more on this).

At the march, we decided to join the masses with hand-made signs. At the last minute, I decided to pull JFA’s “Hope of Change” exhibit sign from the van. The sign features a Margot Rogers image of the unborn adorned with the same art style as Obama’s iconic campaign signs. We debated whether we would regret carrying the 2x4 foot sign around DC, but just after we settled ourselves on the lawn near the Washington monument, an AP Wire reporter approached wanting to know what the sign was about. The sign had done its job: it caused the viewer to stop and engage. (See pictures from the march at JFA’s Instagram page).

View fullsize

After the march, the main work of the day began: we boarded the metro to head to the offices of the Leadership Institute about 15 minutes outside the city. There we presented an interactive dialogue workshop to students from Colorado Christian University along with various others we had invited – about 50 in total. Why did we make this event interactive, featuring a heavy dose of role-play practice? We wanted these participants to stop being mere spectators of abortion discussions and instead engage those around them. So, we used the same emphasis in the workshop itself: we expected participants to engage with what we were teaching by practicing it themselves right there and then.

The same concern animated our team the next day at the National Pro-Life Summit hosted by Students for Life of America (SFLA). We were in the exhibitor hall where participants in the conference might walk by our table only once during the day. How could we help them stop and engage with the need to be trained to dialogue?

View fullsize

View fullsize

See more images on Instagram.

We decided that what stops pro-life advocates in a conference is probably not much different than what stops pro-choice advocates during our outreach events. On campus our poll tables and free speech boards are our most dependable tools that cause people to stop and engage, especially when coupled with an exhibit that challenges the status quo on abortion. (See JFA’s Instagram page for pictures from our February events at three Texas universities: UTSA, Texas State, and Tarleton State.) At this conference filled with passionate pro-life advocates, then, we decided to create special free speech boards with big questions to help these particular passersby stop and engage. It worked beautifully, as you can see from the conference pictures. We had a steady stream of conversations throughout the day about the need for training in dialogue.

Please pray for our upcoming seminar, workshop, and outreach events, that each will help pro-life advocates to stop and engage in learning to dialogue so that they can help pro-choice advocates to stop and engage in rethinking their positions on abortion.

How can you use this concept in your own life to help those around you stop and engage? I suggest sharing a picture of a free speech board from the conference with a pro-life friend, and ask, “How would you answer the question JFA asked on this conference free speech board?”

---

Recent and Upcoming Events

1/21 March for Life & Workshop (Washington, DC)

1/22 National Pro-Life Summit (Hosted by SFLA)

1/30-31 Workshops in Denton & Stephenville (TX)

2/1-2 Outreach at Tarleton State (Stephenville, TX)

2/13 Seminars (San Marcos & San Antonio, TX)

2/14-17 Outreach at Texas State & UTSA (TX)

2/23 UNL Club Meeting Presentation (Lincoln, NE)

2/26-27 Seminars (Wichita, KS)

2/28-3/1 Outreach at Wichita State (KS)

2/28-3/3 Love3 Interactive Workshop (Online)

March-May Outreach Events in AZ, CO, CA, KS

5/2-5 Love3 Interactive Workshop (Online)

See the JFA Calendar for more events and details!

See Instagram for pictures of recent events!

---

A Thought About Back-Alley Abortion

I recommend reading all of Steve Wagner’s article on back-alley abortion, but I wanted to note this section towards the end:

Deal with the More Sophisticated Version

Much of the time, the back-alley concern masks the fact that an abortion advocate is assuming the unborn is not a human being. In other words, she is saying, “It’s wrong to make a surgery more dangerous if it is innocuous.” We can agree in principle, then show that the unborn is a human being and the surgery is not innocuous at all.

Once we’ve made our case, the abortion advocate will likely shift to a more sophisticated argument:

“Even if abortion kills a human being, isn’t it better for fewer people to die (at least we can save the mother)? It is better that at least the mother live, than that she and her fetus should die in the back alley. Isn’t it worse for two to die than one?”

This argument assumes that the mother has no other choice but to kill the child. But, of course, she does have alternatives. As I like to say, she has a third option. It’s not, “Either she kills the child by legal abortion or she kills herself and her child by illegal abortion.” The third option is that she can refrain from killing anyone!

Abortion: From Debate to Dialogue – The Interactive Guide (v. 3.32), pp. 165-166 © 2019 Justice For All, Inc.

"Proud to Stand with Them"

“What JFA teaches and stands for is unlike anything I've seen in other pro-life groups. The humility, empathy, patience, and kindness they exhibit to the students they converse with is how we all should strive to treat one another. The crime of abortion stems from the devaluation of human life as a whole and if we want to save the unborn from the injustices they face every minute, we ought to first treat one another better. This is exactly what I saw from JFA, and I was proud to stand with them in love even in the face of criticism, resentments, and hate.”

- Cole, JFA Volunteer, Nov. 2021

Moral Statement or Moral Impact?

As I write this, seven members of the JFA team are heading towards airports to fly to Washington D.C. to participate with me in the March for Life (Friday, 1/21) and the National Pro-Life Summit (Saturday, 1/22). Since we’ll be marching in opposition to legal abortion, it makes sense that we’d reflect on a question I remember Greg Koukl (str.org) asking years ago that has always stuck with me: Do you want to make a moral statement or a moral impact?

The question is phrased in such a way that it could be seen as purely rhetorical: Obviously we want to make an impact. There isn’t much value to making a statement if in making it we fail to make an impact. Or worse, what if we make an impact contrary to the one we’re intending?

The question is not purely rhetorical, though, because many people are very satisfied with simply making a statement, and many have never reflected on how we might choose particular activities that are more likely to make an impact. Here’s how I reflect and respond:

Our team doesn’t march simply to make the appropriate statement against legal abortion. We are in DC to multiply our work of training a different kind of advocate to create a different kind of conversation that changes hearts and minds. Changing minds, after all, is essential to protecting unborn children in a democratic society, and protecting the unborn is the moral impact that all of the marchers long to see. Please pray with us, then, that through these events we’ll find and inspire potential interns who want to learn to train others, leaders who want us to train the people in their care, and individual pro-life activists who can make a greater impact with the tools we teach.

---

Recent Instagram Post

Recent and Upcoming Events

1/13 Workshop: Young Adults Group (Lincoln, NE)

1/15 Seminar: Homeschool Group (Lincoln, NE)

1/15 San Diego Walk for Life (San Diego, CA)

1/21 March for Life Activities (Washington, DC)

1/21 Workshop: Various Groups (Washington, DC)

1/22 National Pro-Life Summit (Hosted by SFLA)

1/30 Seminar (Denton, TX)

2/13 Seminar (Near San Marcos, TX)

2/14-15 Outreach at Texas State (San Marcos, TX)

See www.jfaweb.org/calendar for more events!

Expecting God's Unexpected

They expected God to send a conquering king, someone who would set things right between the nation of Israel and the Roman Empire. Jesus constantly turned people’s eyes to an unseen world of unseen rulers.

They expected a visible ruler. Jesus appeared invisibly as an embryo in Mary’s womb. Then he walked among them humbly, exercising undisputable wisdom and power not to secure a visible throne but to conquer unseen demons and to destroy lofty opinions raised against the knowledge of God (see II Cor. 10:5).

They expected the Messiah to sit on the throne of David in Jerusalem, respected by everyone for his power. Jesus was lifted high...on a cross, hanged as criminal, disgusting to Jew and Gentile alike.

During Advent and Christmas we pause and re-live that first season of expectation, when the Messiah had not yet appeared. I’d like to suggest we also try to recapture that sense of what those in the first century were expecting. They had a narrative they had built, detailing the way God would be working “any day now.” They were sure of it. And then God moved, deliberately, decisively to do something utterly different.

JFA’s regular dialogue team after outreach at University of Oklahoma in October 2021: Paul Kulas, Tammy Cook, Jeremy Gorr, Rebekah Dyer, Kristina Massa, Kaitlyn Donihue, Mary St. Hilaire, Jon Wagner, Bella O’Neill, Andrea Thenhaus (Missing: Steve Wagner)

Click the image (or this link) to give a gift to JFA to support the work of these missionaries. Each (including Steve Wagner - see other picture) raises his or her support to be able to continue the work of changing hearts and minds on abortion and other important worldview topics.

Note: For a 2021 tax-deductible receipt, please give or postmark your gift by December 31, 2021.

It’s a sort of cautionary tale for us. Be careful of those things you expect with certainty. For God is at work, and his mind is many times quite different than our own.

Along with many others, I listened to the Supreme Court’s December 1 oral arguments on the Dobbs case. Dobbs concerns the Mississippi ban on abortion after 15 weeks which is causing the Supreme Court to consider overruling its landmark cases protecting legal abortion, Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992). I reviewed the thoughts of various commentators before and after. Many expect the Court to overturn Roe and Casey. Many pro-life advocates are quivering with excitement about the potential that many states could then move forward with stronger restrictions against abortion.

Add to this the Supreme Court’s recent decision on Texas SB8, effectively allowing the law to continue to stand as it has since September 1, causing many Texas abortionists to cease doing abortions after a heartbeat is detected (at approximately six weeks from last menstrual period, or four weeks from fertilization – note that the heartbeat arises at about three weeks from fertilization but normally can’t be detected at that point). Many pro-life advocates in other states are monitoring the Texas situation and hoping to utilize the same type of law to curtail many abortions in their own states.

To be sure, even if the Supreme Court’s decisions in these cases result in the saving of one human being’s life, we will rejoice. Nothing I say in what follows is meant to take away from this.

Let’s remember the cautionary tale of the Messiah expected and the Messiah come: be careful of those visible outcomes you expect with certainty.

It is the same with these Supreme Court cases. Be careful of the visible outcomes you expect with certainty. Sure, the words of some commentators could turn out to be wise, even prophetic. Roe and Casey may be on their way out. The Texas law may survive other challenges and prove to be an effective strategy to stop abortions. These things may all be true. But God – God may be moving in spite of expectations to bring about some other results we can’t even imagine.

We look back at our first century Jewish counterparts and caution them in retrospect to look not for what they had come to expect from their Messiah and God’s plan and the meaning of redemption. We caution them to instead “seek first his kingdom and his righteousness” (see Matt. 6:33). We caution them to “set their mind on the things of God and not on the things of man” (see Mark 8:31-33). We caution them to humbly pray for the strength to wait on the Lord, to know him more deeply, to do his will in this day, regardless of the visible outcomes he brings tomorrow. In short, we caution them to “walk by faith, not by sight” (see II Cor. 5:7).

In the same way, I encourage each of us to pray for the strength to seek to know God in this time, to be with him, even as we earnestly desire for all unborn children to be protected from violence. Our task is not to divine the decisions of the Supreme Court with a certainty we cannot reasonably have about the future; our task is to keep ourselves doing the things we know with certainty God has given us to do today.

The Gospel accounts and the Book of Acts tell the story vividly. Over and over again, the Jews were surprised by the way God was working out his plan. Perhaps we might even say that surprise is the dominant theme of those books.

I suspect that surprise will also continue to be the dominant theme of our work seeking justice for all. I don’t know what God will do with the law in 2022, but I am rather certain of one thing: He will surprise me.

So let us then keep our eyes fixed on God, earnestly seeking what he would have us do in this day. Let us earnestly seek to be with him in his work and to enjoy his decision to be with us in his Son, Immanuel, God with us.

With this in mind, our team is gearing up to keep doing in 2022 those things we believe God has uniquely gifted us to do. We will seek to change hearts and minds so that abortion is unthinkable, and so that love for women and children is kindled into thoughtful action that is unstoppable. We will train as many people as we can to create as many conversations as they can, in hopes of seeing God change the world in a way only he can.

Thank you for standing with us but also kneeling with us before the Father, as we tie all of our expectations and hopes to him and the surprising ways he is working in our midst.

Help JFA “Expect God’s Unexpected” in 2022

Thank you for your faithful support of Justice For All. There’s still time to give an end-of-year gift. Click the picture or click this link to donate or postmark your gift by December 31, 2021.

Pictured above is JFA’s outreach team during California events in November 2021: Andrea Thenhaus, Kaitlyn Donihue, Steve Wagner, Jon Wagner, Rebekah Dyer, Kristina Massa, Bella O’Neill

Please pray with us for every event and every conversation we create, looking with trusting expectation to see what results God is pleased to bring from them, even if he surprises us.

Merry Christmas!