Human Fetuses Are Not Parasites

Free Speech Board comment at the University of Kansas.

“The fetus is just a parasite.” Some pro-choice advocates make this claim, and they can mean very different things by referring to unborn children as “parasites”. A student at Kansas University wrote the following:

The women’s rights should take precedence over the rights of a parasite (technical definition of a fetus in the 1st trimester) because she is already an existing human who has every right to decline to birth something that she might not be able to take care of, or would be psychologically traumatic to raise or give up. NOT YOUR BODY, NOT YOUR CHOICE.

Let’s break down some aspects of this comment:

“The women’s rights should take precedence over the rights of a parasite (technical definition of a fetus in the 1st trimester)…” If after asking clarification questions you find that the person is using the parasite language in a biological sense, it’s important to point out that fetuses do not fit the scientific criteria for parasitism. JFA Trainer Rebekah Dyer notes this in her article Human Fetuses are Not Parasites:

fetuses do “not match the biological definition of a parasite. 'Biologically defined, parasitism is a “form of symbiosis in which one organism (called a parasite) benefits at the expense of another organism usually of different species (called a host). This host-parasite association may eventuate to the injury of the host.' In order to understand the relationship between mother and fetus, we need to look at the various types of symbiosis. There are three kinds of symbiosis: commensalism, mutualism and parasitism. In commensalism, only one species benefits while the other is neither harmed nor benefited. In mutualism, both partners benefit. In parasitism, one organism benefits while the other suffers harm."

The parasite claim is often complex and the person using the term can mean different things by it. Sometimes the person doesn’t mean it in a biological sense at all. Rebekah Dyer’s second article on the parasite term goes more into depth on this aspect of the “parasite” claim some pro-choice advocates make, and she provides insight on how to navigate that in conversation.

Note that the writer of this comment states that the woman is “already an existing human” implying the additional phrase, “unlike the unborn who is not an existing human yet.” But this is merely an assumption. It begs the central question “What is the unborn?” Then the comment concludes with a bodily rights statement at the end.

To learn how to respond to comments like these, sign up for our Love3 Workshops.

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.

Flipping Tables in the Courtyard

My team spent three days at Boise State University in August. Although abortion is banned in Idaho, most of the students who voted on our poll were pro-choice, suggesting that the laws are vulnerable to change.

A female student at Boise State University charged towards me and, with all her might, tried to rip the “No” sign off our poll table. Everyone’s attention turned to her. She seemed to have zero shame. I contemplated calling the police but first wanted to give her a chance to redeem herself, if she was willing. Whatever I would say, I needed to avoid adding more fuel to the fire.

Kristina: It looks like you’re very passionate about this issue. Would you be open to sharing why?

Like many students I meet on campus, she was angry that her perceived right to abortion was up for debate. As she spoke, I built rapport by acknowledging any common ground we had and refraining from challenging her accusations. She must have realized that I wasn’t her enemy because she started to cool down.

Changing the subject, she asked:

Student: Are you one of those homophobic people?

Kristina: I do think that marriage is for a man and a woman. If you’re interested, I’d be happy to share why.

Student: Jesus taught love and kindness. I just wish more people were kind to each other.

Kristina: I do, too. Do you think, though, that trying to damage our display exhibited kindness?

Her face flushed with embarrassment.

Student: I am so sorry about that. I just had a “flipping tables in the temple” moment. I was angry, and when I get angry, I can hardly control myself.

Her demeanor continued to soften.

As I asked more questions about her life, I learned that she was raised in the Episcopalian church, her parents were divorced, and her dad had a boyfriend.

Student: Jesus preached against judging people, and he actually thought highly of women. He was even kind to prostitutes.

Kristina: He did treat women well, which was countercultural at the time. In the story of the woman caught in adultery, he challenged the Pharisees who were accusing her by saying, “Let the man without sin cast the first stone.” But do you know what he did afterwards?

Student: No, what did he do?

Kristina: He said to the adulterous woman, “Go, and sin no more.” He taught repentance. So Jesus’ full message is faith in him accompanied by love and repentance. We have to turn from our sin.

Student: What does “sin” mean?

She seemed to know so much, yet so little at the same time, but she was enthusiastic to learn.

I walked her through the story of the fall in the Garden of Eden, how each of us has disobeyed God by violating the moral law, and how Jesus is the only way to freedom from sin. I also shared why marriage is a covenant that can only exist between a man and a woman. While she didn’t agree with my explanation, she didn’t argue with it either.

Kristina: Would it be alright if I prayed with you right now?

Student: Sure!

We bowed our heads. I thanked God for our conversation and the unique gifts that He gave her. I also asked that her heart would be opened to knowing Jesus and to turning from the sin in her life. Then it was time for her next class.

Student: I learned a lot today, and I really appreciated this conversation. Again, I am so sorry for trying to damage your display.

It was like the woman I met earlier that morning was a new person! We said our goodbyes and parted ways.

Thank you for your prayers and support as I continue in this mission. It’s through experiences like these that I know the Holy Spirit is with my team and moving in the people with whom we speak. God generously gives second chances, and witnessing the character growth of this student was a humbling reminder of the countless redemptive opportunities He continues to offer me (and every one of us!).

"Hey You! You're a Gender Traitor!"

In a conversation at Cal State San Marcos in October

I was in the middle of a conversation at Texas State University awhile ago, and a woman singled me out and yelled, “Hey you! You’re a gender traitor!” She proceeded to swear at me as she walked by. While this wasn’t a pleasant experience, when it came to mind recently I thought of Proverbs 20:5 which says, “The purpose in a man’s heart is like deep water, but a man of understanding will draw it out.”

Sometimes our lives intersect with other people at times when they are deeply suffering and struggling. When we bring up difficult topics they may react in very negative ways. I’m not saying that’s what was going on with this woman. I didn’t get to talk to her, so I don’t know. There are some people who just want to deride and attack those with whom they disagree, and it’s not a great use of our time to try to engage them. But that is not the norm. I think we should give people the benefit of the doubt in these situations. We all have bad moments, and being on the receiving end of someone else’s bad moment gives us an opportunity to extend God’s grace to them.

I was at the University of Northern Colorado in September, and I asked a woman who was signing our poll if she wanted to share her thoughts about abortion. She put the pen down, looked at me, and in some colorful language basically said she didn’t care what other people thought so she would be happy to talk. I remember hoping the interaction would end quickly because I assumed it wasn’t going to go well. But I was wrong. It ended up being my best conversation that week, and I got to tell her about Jesus!

Proverbs 19:11 tells us that it is our “glory to overlook an offense.” I have found that if I don’t react to mean or dismissive comments, and I genuinely try to understand the people in front of me, I have a better chance to get to know them, their story, and why they believe what they do. Oftentimes this gives me the opportunity to challenge their false beliefs more effectively and point them to the truth.

Give people second chances. Third chances. Even fourth chances. Don’t give up on them too quickly. What is going on inside of people is like that deep well we read about in Proverbs 20:5. We are not going to get to the bottom quickly. Many people are angry, hurt, confused, and lost. That may make for some rough beginnings to our conversations, but that’s okay.

I am entering my fifth year with Justice For All, and I’m so thankful for your financial support and prayers that make my work possible. In Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis says, “If there were no help from Christ, there would be no help from other human beings.” God works through you and me to help the people He puts in my path, whether I’m talking to students on campus, sidewalk counseling at the abortion clinic, teaching at our workshops, or meeting with local ministry leaders to plan events. I’m grateful for all of the opportunities I have to help others as they wrestle with questions surrounding why human beings, born and unborn, should be protected and loved. Thank you for investing in me. I couldn’t do this without you.

Is Abortion just a Choice?

After our team finished setting up at Colorado State University for the day, I walked over to our poll table which asked the question, “Should Abortion Remain Legal?”

A young man I’ll call “David” walked over and signed the yes side. After I greeted him, I began to ask him about his beliefs. He believed the unborn is human, and he did not like abortion. Nevertheless, he felt that abortion should be legal because he did not want the government controlling what we can and cannot do. Our conversation went something like this:

Outreach at Palomar College in California October 2023

Andrea: I agree with you that choice is important. Obviously, we live in America where we have many freedoms. It is important to be able to make choices as long as these choices do not harm other human beings.

David: Yeah, I get that.

Andrea: We probably agree that murder, rape, and child abuse is wrong and should not be legal, right?

David: Yes.

Andrea: We have laws in place against those actions to protect human beings from harm. For example, it is illegal for someone to come to this campus and start shooting because that “choice” would harm other human beings. It is the same with the abortion issue. Since the unborn is a living human being, abortion is a choice that takes the life of an innocent human being.

David: Wow! I have never thought about it that way. That makes sense.

Andrea: Another way to think about it is to imagine that we have two buckets. One bucket is full of choices like your favorite ice cream flavor, what degree you want to get, your favorite sport, and so forth. These would be personal preferences. I think we agree that we should have the freedom to make those choices. The other bucket is full of choices that harm another human being, like murder, rape, and child abuse. Which bucket would you say abortion belongs in? (Read more about how my colleague Tammy Cook came up with this two-bucket analogy at www.jfaweb.org/two-buckets)

David: Oh…I would have to say that abortion belongs in the bucket of choices that harm another human being!

I often talk to people like David who believe the unborn is a living human being and believe abortion is wrong, but also think it should be legal because they feel it is merely a personal preference. It is helpful to point out why abortion should be illegal. Since the unborn is a living human being, elective abortion kills an innocent child. Therefore, elective abortion should not be legal.

As we enter the Thanksgiving and Christmas season, I want to thank you for all your prayers and support. As I reflect back on all God has done this year, I am in awe. It has been incredible to see Him at work. It is people like you who make it possible for me to have these conversations and to help JFA behind the scenes as we work to train many Christians to do the same! If you are not part of my support team, please prayerfully consider joining by giving an end-of-year gift or a monthly pledge.

Welcome ETS and EPS Members!

In his paper today at the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) National Conference, Spencer Stewart discussed JFA’s model of creating a bridge from Seat Work to Feet Work as a model of pro-life education. If you are a member of ETS or the Evangelical Philosophical Society (EPS), welcome. Here are links to JFA’s resources which may interest you:

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)

Secular Pro-Life Resources

It’s common for pro-life and pro-choice advocates alike to assume the pro-life position is inherently religious.

For pro-life advocates, we encourage them to consider beginning conversations with secular arguments in order to not put unnecessary stumbling blocks in someone’s way. We also ask pro-life advocates to consider that even if they hold religious reasons for their position, they can also hold non-religious, publicly-accessible reasons for their position that can persuade the masses in a pluralistic society such as ours in 21st century US. See, for example, Rebecca Hotovy’s “#Mindblown” conversation with Brian. Brian began with the belief that he could not support a law against abortion because his reason for his pro-life view was religious. He believed it was wrong to put his religious view into law. Rebecca Hotovy deftly showed him that he also held his position for a reason that didn’t rely on explicitly religious support: it’s wrong and should be illegal to harm someone else.

For pro-choice advocates, we encourage them to consider the fact that there are many pro-life advocates who are agnostics or atheists. The gutsy new presidential candidate Terrisa Bukovinac is one high-profile example. The apologists at Secular Pro-Life are examples as well. Many of the folks at Libertarians for Life are also non-religious.

For pro-life and pro-choice advocates alike, we recommend the following resources from these atheistic and agnostic pro-life advocates. While we don’t agree with the atheism or agnosticism of the authors of these resources, they nonetheless contain many good arguments and truth claims, and they can help religious pro-life advocates frame their arguments in ways that are more persuasive to the average non-religious person. This is right in line with our emphasis on finding common ground when possible.

The Pain that Lies Beneath

In one sense, conversations about abortion are really simple. Abortion kills an innocent human being, and that shouldn’t be legal.

Psychologically and emotionally though, this issue is incredibly complicated. People’s stories and their experiences influence how they view and understand simple ideas. When deep pain and trauma are influencing their views, those simple ideas can become complicated.

I talked to “Emily” at Fullerton College in January. My colleague Jon Wagner shared with me afterward that she had signed our free speech board and had written something about abortion being an issue of women’s bodily rights. He said she was visibly agitated and shaking.

From the free speech board, she went to our poll table where I asked her if she wanted to share her thoughts. She quickly told me that our display was disturbing to her. She didn’t like it and said the pictures of embryology were “harmful.” She told me our outreach on campus was “part of the problem” and didn’t do justice to what is going on with this issue. While I did not agree that our display was “harmful,” the things she shared throughout our conversation helped me begin to understand why she felt the way she did.

When I started asking her questions, she told me that she had a friend who was raped and became pregnant. Her friend decided to keep the baby, but she committed suicide shortly after giving birth. She was only thirteen. (Her baby is now five years old.)

She also shared with me that she has a friend who was addicted to meth when he was born due to the choices of the mother. She told me that this friend doesn’t like her life and that she doesn’t want to live anymore. In addition to this, Emily told me that she has a condition where if she got pregnant, she could either keep taking her medication and her baby would be severely deformed or she could stop taking her medicine, the baby would be fine, but she would die after giving birth.

At some point in our conversation, she also shared with me that she was a Christian and thought that abortion was murder in the third trimester. Earlier in pregnancy though, she said that we cannot have laws against abortion, because there are too many circumstances that the law can’t take into account.

Pain and tragedy deeply affect people. The suffering in their pasts can warp their perspectives on issues that are morally clear. Those clear issues become unclear to them when they look at them through the lens of the shattered lives of themselves or their friends. Knowing this can help us understand why good and clear arguments appear to make no headway with some people. I know it can be frustrating when we lay out a clear case for something we believe to be true and are only met with statements that seem to show the other person is “not getting it.”

In a conversation at Fullerton in January 2023.

I think taking a step back and really engaging with the pain people experience can help us be empathetic and compassionate while we speak up for the rights of unborn human beings in this country.

Towards the end of our conversation, Emily told me that while she loves the five-year-old child her friend chose to have after she was raped, she wishes she could have her friend back instead. In Emily’s mind, if her friend had chosen abortion, she would still be here. The abortion would have “saved” her life. As odd as that may sound to us, I think that kind of statement points us to something important.

Sometimes it can feel like we just need the right argument or the right response to refute wrong beliefs. I think knowing good arguments is incredibly important because they do impact people’s views and their behavior. But sometimes, arguments aren’t going to do what we want them to do with someone who is still grieving the loss of her friend. It’s a matter of triage. When someone is bleeding out, has a sprained ankle, a broken arm, and some minor cuts, we have to assess which injury is most urgent and focus on it first. All of them are important, but we can’t focus on all of them at once.

Given the length of my conversation with Emily, I did end up making the case for why abortion is not a good solution to the tragic circumstances she talked about. No matter how great our pain is, it doesn’t give us the right to kill another human being. In these kinds of conversations, I don’t always present arguments. It’s not because I don’t care about making good arguments for why unborn children should be protected legally. It’s because sometimes given the time I have, I decide that making an argument is not the best thing to do at that moment. I trust that God will bring someone else in her life later when she is more willing and ready to hear arguments that challenge her beliefs.

I think it’s a judgment call we all need to make at times. Do I make an argument and address her incorrect beliefs now? Do I just listen and empathize with her? Do I do both? I believe we can trust that God will guide us as we make these decisions in our conversations.

Even in the midst of darkness, great evil, and tragedy, life is worth living and protecting because we serve Jesus, God in human flesh, who rose out of his own tomb victorious over death and evil. Even though this is true, there are so many people who do not feel like life is worth living, and that chasm is something we have the privilege of helping close. In this valley of tears, may we be willing to enter into uncomfortable and difficult conversations with others so that we can bridge this gap together.

You’re Invited! Oct. 17 Workshop at Christopher Newport University

Event

“Creating Dialogue on Abortion to Reach Hearts and Minds - An Interactive Workshop led by Steve Wagner”

Date

October 17, 2023

Place

Washington Conference Room, David Student Union Building, Christopher Newport Univ., Newport News, VA

Time

Part I: 5:30 PM - 7:00 PM (Check in at 5:15 PM; Includes Pizza Dinner)

Part II: 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM (Check in at 6:50 PM; Includes Dessert)

Note: Each part includes different content. You may attend one or the other, or attend both for the best experience. More notes on Content below.

Cost

There is no charge for this event, but you may make a donation to defray event costs.

Content

Part I will cover the following topics (some interactively, some briefly):

  • Three Essential Skills: You can start a conversation and keep it productive using just three skills: listening to understand, asking questions with an open heart, and finding common ground when possible.

  • Are Images Helpful? Learn to use images appropriately and sensitively in order to help people face the reality of abortion. Learn to use JFA’s “Invitation to Dialogue” Brochure (digital version and paper version) to guide a conversation.

  • One Central Question: Focus on the question, “What is the unborn?” and defend the idea that the unborn is a living human organism biologically.

Part II will cover the following topics (some interactively, some briefly):

  • The Equal Rights Mystery: Many people are unsure if the unborn are persons or have equal rights to the rest of us. We train you in this session to navigate that conversation beginning with the common ground of the Equal Rights Mystery.

  • The Question of Rape: Learn to meet both the relational and intellectual challenges inherent in the questions: “Is abortion right or wrong in the case of rape? Should it be legal in the case of rape?”

  • Do Bodily Rights Mean Abortion Is Okay? When someone says a woman should have a right to do what she wants with her body, we always begin with a response that surprises many pro-life advocates. Then we also offer a sophisticated intellectual response.

  • Q&A including Threats to the Pregnant Mother's Life and “Personally Opposed but It Should Stay Legal”

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 setting the right expectations for results and seeing your advocacy as one piece of a bigger puzzle

  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