"I'd Rather Be Aborted."

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Only Two Questions?

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

View fullsize

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Note: This letter is the third in a series of letters on conversation skills we teach volunteers that help them get started having conversations and encourage them to stay active. See the previous letters in the series:

• “Be a Playmaker” (jfaweb.org/feb-2023)

• “Thinking about the Unborn for the First Time” (jfaweb.org/may-2023)

See Other Letters in this Series

Love One Another

Outreach at UT Austin, November 2023

One morning at Colorado State University, a student I will call “Heather” approached our poll table. Her demeanor was cold, and she matter-of-factly blurted out, “I believe abortion should be legal because many women will die in childbirth. Abortion should be legal for any reason.”

This conversation could definitely be challenging, I thought to myself.

Ellerslie Discipleship Training in Colorado, September 2023

I realized it was important for me to understand what was motivating Heather’s passion, so I began asking her questions. Heather shared with me that she had a rough childhood. Her mom, grandma, and several aunts were single mothers. She had watched them struggle as they tried to make it alone. I spent time acknowledging how hard that must have been.

 As the conversation progressed, I was able to walk through many of the pro-life arguments, and she seemed receptive.

After having a serious discussion about abortion, I began to inquire about her personal life. She was from a different state and had not made many friends at college. I could tell she was lonely and appreciated the opportunity to talk to someone.

At one point, the conversation shifted to spiritual matters. I had the opportunity to share the hope of the gospel with her, and we talked about why we need a Savior. She was quite open to discussing her beliefs with me. I asked Heather if she had a Bible. She told me that she did, but she had not brought it with her to college. I gave her the Gospel of John, which she gladly received.

Throughout the course of the conversation, Heather began to lighten up. At one point we both were laughing as she showed me pictures of her pets and shared stories from her science classes.

By the end of the conversation, I felt like I was talking to a different person. Her whole attitude had changed, and she seemed to be enjoying our time together. Before Heather left, she said, “Thank you so much for having this conversation. This was very meaningful!”

As I reflected on this interaction, I was reminded how important it is to show people that we care about them and to take an interest in their lives. Although Heather did not completely change her mind during our conversation, I am confident that she is more open to discussing pro-life issues. The first step in being able to reach someone is to show them we care. When we begin there, we end up having great opportunities to make a difference in their lives.

Masked Conversations

February 2024 Impact Report

When our team conducts campus outreach, we start conversations with people of all different types. What’s pretty common among all of this diversity, though, is the tendency for people to hide behind various kinds of masks. On Halloween every year, these masks are visible. On all other days, the masks are invisible but nonetheless present.

In this Impact Report, JFA trainer Rebekah Dyer tells the story of one conversation that had both the visible type of mask and the invisible type of mask. In the conversation, she modeled an excellent approach each of us can use as Christian ambassadors to build trust in order to help people come out from behind their masks and partner with us in finding truth.

Steve Wagner, Executive Director

Rebekah spoke with another masked man on Halloween at the University of North Texas (UNT) in fall 2023.

On Halloween last year, I was at the University of North Texas, and I noticed a man in a scary, tan-colored mask with no mouth and black eyes. He was looking at our embryology pictures.

I asked him what he thought about abortion. He shrugged and motioned to his mask. An interesting interaction ensued as I asked him questions, and he tried to answer with hand motions. Here’s the gist of the conversation that followed:

At UNT, a banana signed “No, abortion should not be legal.” Seth (hat) is visible talking to another student.

“Wait,” I asked, “can you not talk in the mask?” He nodded. “Is it that tight?” He nodded again. “How long have you been wearing it?” He made a motion with his hands. “You’ve been wearing it for twenty-one hours?” I asked, surprised. With an exasperated sigh he motioned again. “Two and a half hours?” I guessed again. He nodded vigorously. “Wow!” I said. “Well, if you want to chat, I’ll be around.”

“This is gonna look bad, but I’m going to sign,” said the Grim Reaper to JFA trainer Kristina at UNT. Then she proceeded to sign “Yes” on our poll.

I stepped away to make some notes about another conversation I had had that day. A few minutes later the student took off his mask, and we began to have a normal conversation. “Landon” told me he was in the middle on this issue. As I asked him questions, he shared that he thought abortion should be broadly legal so that women who have life-threatening complications during pregnancy have access to abortion. He shared that he had a friend who had been raped and had gotten pregnant at thirteen years old. This friend had also had seven abortions. Landon also told me people should be educated about abortion so that they know that it kills another human being.

As we spoke, I was hearing some conflicting things from Landon, so I asked the following question to help clarify some of the confusion:

Rebekah: What if we could have a law that made elective abortion broadly illegal, but had an exception for cases where the life of the mother is in danger?

Landon: Oh, that’s brilliant!

Rebekah: That’s what the current law is in Texas.

Landon was surprised and told me he agreed with the current law. As our conversation began to wind down he confessed something to me:

Landon: I need to apologize to you. I lied to you earlier. I can talk just fine in this mask. I was worried that you were going to yell at me when I walked up. I wanted to check out the signs, but I didn’t want to talk to anyone.

Rebekah: Thank you for telling me. I forgive you. I can understand why it might feel intimidating to come up to this display if you have that fear.

During our conversation, he shared with me that he was a Christian. Whenever someone tells me he is a Christian, I always ask him what he means by that. Landon answered by referencing the Nicene Creed.

This conversation highlights a few important things. First, if we jump to challenging people the moment we hear something with which we disagree, we can easily talk past them and address a view they don’t hold. In every conversation, it is crucial that we ask good questions and listen in order to understand the other person’s views. Landon went from sounding like he was in the middle on this issue, to sounding very pro-choice, to finally clarifying that he was actually opposed to the vast majority of abortions. If I hadn’t slowed down and asked Landon questions, I could have missed what he was trying to communicate.

Second, many people are unaware of the abortion laws in their own state. There is also a lot of apathy and ignorance surrounding what abortion is and what it does to another human being. When we have conversations about these things we have the opportunity to inform people and help move their hearts toward loving forgotten human beings, especially the unborn.

Third, many people are understandably uncomfortable talking about abortion. They are afraid of being verbally attacked, yelled at, and ridiculed. I understand that fear because I’ve had those experiences, and it affected the way I felt going into some future conversations. I’ve learned that acting against my fear and discomfort is necessary and something I’m called to do as a Christian. God meets us in those places of fear, and He empowers us to engage in the midst of difficult situations. By treating people with kindness and gentleness, we can invite others to engage in the conversation in spite of their fears.

In my experience, most conversations about abortion are not hostile. When people see that I want to have a civil conversation about an important issue, they are open to engaging in a respectful way. I think we can give people a gift on multiple levels. We can give them a good experience in a conversation about a difficult topic by asking questions, listening, and truly understanding them. Then we can help them get closer to the truth by challenging them to stop tolerating the killing of innocent children in the womb.

Should We Flip-Flop When Someone Flips Out?

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

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

Click here for the Printable Version.

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

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

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

Greg Koukl's "Street Smarts" - Highly Recommended!

See my review from a few months ago of Greg Koukl’s recent offering, Street Smarts: Using Questions to Answer Christianity's Toughest Challenges. As you can see, I highly recommend it.

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.

Event Announcement: Long Island, NY (March 9, 2024)

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!

Click here for a Printable Version including a reflection on this story from Executive Director, Steve Wagner.

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: