JFA Blog — Justice For All

New here? Our Stories Page is a great place to start!

Joanna Bai

Which Kind of "Wrong" Is "Right"?

With Dobbs returning abortion policy back to the states and consequently back to the people, pro-life advocates need to actively engage others in dialogue, perhaps now more than ever. In a “Classic Reprint” of a 2012 letter we sent to supporters this month, Joanna Bai illustrates how to listen to understand, make careful distinctions, and challenge people in a gentle way that helps them think more clearly. She also models the humble spirit we at JFA aim to bring to all of our work, being willing to say, “I was mistaken.” It can’t be overstated how important this is to help people feel free to adopt that same humble spirit. “Humble” is one of ten character qualities described in the Ambassador’s Creed from Stand to Reason. Our team reviews this excellent list every year as a reminder, and we heartily recommend it. - Steve Wagner, Executive Director


A large group was forming around JFA volunteer Lori Navrodtzke as she spoke with a student named “Julie” at our University of Kansas (KU) outreach last month [September 2012]. Intrigued, I also listened in.

Julie seemed opposed to our attempts to change people’s views about the morality of abortion because she believed that morals are relative. She explained that society sets moral standards based on what it thinks is beneficial for people. I requested permission to ask a clarifying question.

Joanna: From the little I’ve heard of your conversation, it sounds to me like you’ve asserted that we [at JFA] are wrong to impose our standard of morality on others. Is that correct?

Julie: Yes. That is what I meant.

Joanna: If you make that assertion, isn’t that action [of asserting that JFA is wrong] imposing your standard of morality on us? Your view does not seem to line up with itself.

In other words, her claim seemed to be self-refuting. She then agreed there was a problem in her claim, but only as I had presented it.

As she clarified her position, I saw that I had equivocated on her use of the term “wrong.” Perhaps she didn’t mean that it is unjust (morally wrong) to make a moral claim about abortion. Perhaps she really meant that we were mistaken (logically wrong) in claiming that there is any such thing as objective moral truth.

“Maybe she isn’t making a moral claim at all,” I thought. What she said next confirmed this:

Julie: You can say whatever you want about your beliefs, but those beliefs don’t make it bad for someone else to do something contrary to them.

Sensing that I had been missing her intent, I asked another clarifying question.

Joanna: Do you reject the idea of objective truth in general, or do you only reject the idea of objective moral truth specifically?

Julie: I only reject the idea of objective moral truth.

Clarifying this was extremely helpful to our conversation. In doing so, I realized she actually believed in truth and falsehood – just not truth and falsehood regarding moral claims. She believed there are such things as false beliefs, and she believed that one of my false beliefs was that there are objective moral wrongs (such as abortion). In other words, she believed there is an objective truth that morality is subjective.

She continued to clarify her thoughts.

Julie: I do believe in objective truth. Truth is that which can be proven empirically.

Now we were getting somewhere. She believed that truth is only that which is empirically proven (observed using the five senses). While my concern about self-refutation missed the mark with her previous statement, it was clearly appropriate now. I attempted to help her see the problem.

Joanna: Julie, can you empirically prove the statement you just made?

(In other words, “Can your statement hold to its own standard?”) Her statement about empirical proof would have to be proved by philosophical means, not empirical – but the statement itself didn’t leave room for any philosophical statements to be taken seriously!

This conversation clarified a number of things for me. First, while the denial of objective truth is self-refuting, the denial of moral truth is not necessarily self-refuting. Sure, if Julie had meant, “It is morally wrong to say any action is morally wrong,” that claim would have been self-refuting because the act of making the claim would violate the meaning of the claim itself. But Julie didn’t make that claim. By using the word “wrong,” she made it possible for me to confuse her meaning. She had actually meant that we were “mistaken” rather than morally wrong.

We need to be careful to try to understand what people mean before we accuse them of holding contradictory points of view.

As it turned out, Julie did have a view that was self-refuting – the very common claim that truth is only that which can be empirically proven. That’s a claim that can’t live by its own rules. So, unlike the claim, “You’re wrong (incorrect) to think there are moral rules,” (which is false for other reasons), this claim, “Truth is only that which can be proven empirically,” actually is self-refuting because one can’t know that the statement itself is true through empirical means. If the statement is true, then it is also false. Now, that’s a problem!

In talking with Julie, I experienced the importance of “listening to reflect,” rather than “listening simply to refute.” We need to be careful to try to understand what people mean before we accuse them of holding contradictory points of view. When I asserted that Julie’s initial claim was self-refuting, I was assuming I understood what she meant by “wrong.” When I stepped back and listened more carefully, it became clear I had misunderstood her. This further listening proved to be providential. By listening to understand her view clearly, I was able to ask better questions, which put us on the path of finding truth together.


Joanna Bai served as a JFA trainer from 2012-2022. This story was originally published in Joanna Bai’s October 2012 newsletter (“Which Kind of ‘Wrong’ Is ‘Right’ - How a Conversation at KU Taught Me to Listen”). See also Joanna’s “One Central Question Helps Change a Mind” which we featured in March of this year. Read many other excellent letters by Joanna and other alumni trainers JFA has had the privilege to employ over the years at the link below.

Featured Image (Steve Wagner): Walkway near the Governor’s Palace at Colonial Williamsburg, Virginia.

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.

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

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...

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

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

This Saturday: Free One-Day Training Intensive

“7 Conversations in 7 Hours”

Register now and experience JFA’s acclaimed dialogue training from anywhere!

Nov. 14, 2020 (Sat.): One-Day Intensive
1:00 PM - 8:30 PM Central
(with a break for dinner from 6:00 PM - 6:30 PM Central)

“Having been in the pro-life movement since 1980, this training is nothing like I’ve ever experienced. At our local [pregnancy] center, we are making it essential for our Client Advocates (in addition to their regular training).”
— Mike, “7 Conversations in 7 Hours” participant

"7 Conversations" One-Week Training Intensive - Starting Tonight!

“7 Conversations in 7 Hours” - 2 New Options

Register now and experience JFA’s acclaimed dialogue training from anywhere!

Nov. 9-14 (M-Sat.): One-Week Intensive
M, T, W, Th, F @ 7:00 PM - 8:00 PM Central; Sat @ 6:30-8:30 PM Central

Can’t participate on weeknights? Join us for a one-day intensive instead. Offered this Saturday:

Nov. 14 (Sat.): One-Day Intensive
1:00 PM - 8:30 PM Central (with a break for dinner from 6:00 PM - 6:30 PM Central)

Are you a man and intimidated by conversations about abortion? - Resource List

Have You Subscribed to JFA's YouTube Channel?

The “Dialogue with Julia” outreach video we recently posted on JFA’s Instagram (@picturejusticeforall) is just one of the real JFA outreach conversations and team member reflections shared on JFA’s YouTube channel. Subscribe today!

Prepare for your own conversations by watching Rebecca share the Equal Rights Argument (Part 1), graciously challenge the idea that legalized abortion aligns with feminism (Part 2), ask key clarification questions related to women’s rights and bodil…

Prepare for your own conversations by watching Rebecca share the Equal Rights Argument (Part 1), graciously challenge the idea that legalized abortion aligns with feminism (Part 2), ask key clarification questions related to women’s rights and bodily autonomy (Part 3), and offer evidence for the biological humanity of the unborn (Part 4). Why not share the video with a friend and ask, “Have you ever been a part of a conversation about unintended pregnancy and abortion like this one?”

Harper (Instagram Link)

JFA Trainer, Tammy Cook (left), talks with a student at University of Oklahoma (OU) in 2015.

JFA Trainer, Tammy Cook (left), talks with a student at University of Oklahoma (OU) in 2015.

Click here to view the story, “My Aha Moment!” by JFA Trainer Tammy Cook.

“Harper was pro-choice at the start of this conversation and believed a woman should have a right to an abortion for any reason at any time… At the end he was opposed to the majority of abortions, which was a huge change.”

Tammy met Harper at the University of Texas at Dallas, where he was protesting JFA’s outreach event. Click here to read Tammy’s vivid description of their conversation.

"7 Conversations" Online Workshops - Session 1 Starts This Week!

“7 CONVERSATIONS IN 7 HOURS”

Practical Training for Discussing Abortion

  • Tuesday Mornings @ 10 AM Central: Sept 22-Nov 3, 2020 (7 Weeks)

  • Tuesday Nights @ 7 PM Central: Sept 22-Nov 3, 2020 (7 Weeks)

  • Thursday Mornings @ 10 AM Central: Sept 24-Nov 5, 2020 (7 Weeks)

  • Thursday Nights @ 8 PM Central: Sept 24-Nov 5, 2020 (7 Weeks)

All workshops are free of charge!

I am not an articulate person and definitely avoid anxiety-producing situations of talking to someone who might disagree with me. But because of the course and the website I now have a resource...to help me to know what to say, and most importantly how to say it.
— Donna, "7 Conversations in 7 Hours" participant
Having been in the pro-life movement since 1980, this training is nothing like I’ve ever experienced. At our local [pregnancy] center, we are making it essential for our Client Advocates (in addition to their regular training).
— Mike, “7 Conversations in 7 Hours” participant

Common Ground Without Compromise

Here’s a note from Steve Wagner, author of Common Ground Without Compromise, reflecting on the book in 2018:

It’s been ten years since Common Ground Without Compromise was published, and I’m excited to see so many pro-life people now talking about finding common ground as essential to advocating for unborn children. I intended the book as a letter to all sides of the abortion debate, suggesting that we could make more progress in discussing abortion if we consciously made an effort to agree whenever possible. I look at the landscape now, with many cultural observers saying ‘we are more polarized than ever,’ and I think we need to continue to make finding common ground a habit — just as much as we need to be ready to support our beliefs with good reasons. Finding common ground, though, has the power to cause people who disagree with us to want to listen to those reasons we’re eager to share, even as it has the power to help us to want to listen to the many true things they are saying.”

Resources for Healing After Abortion

RESOURCES

If you or someone you know is considering abortion or has had an abortion in the past, here are resources 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.

TESTIMONIES OF HEALING AFTER ABORTION

JFA Staff and Volunteers share stories of conversations with men and women who have had experiences with abortion.

  • "Jamie" - After Jamie looked at an abortion photo and told CK Wisner that the photo "condemns [me] to hell," she found hope and healing through her conversation with CK.  In this letter, CK shared many word-for-word excerpts from the conversation that took place in fall 2015.

  • Christina - Read this story to see why Christina, with three abortions in her past, told staff member Tammy Cook just two days after seeing abortion images on the Justice For All Exhibit, “Thank you so much, Tammy. I feel like you’ve given me my life back."

JFA Volunteers with abortion in their pasts answer the question, "What did your experience with JFA mean to you?"

  • Angela: "The Power of One" (Regular JFA Volunteer, writing in 2013)

  • Anne  (Regular JFA Volunteer, writing in 2013)

  • Judy  (Regular JFA Volunteer since 2011) 

  • Lori  (Regular JFA Volunteer since 2011; JFA Mentor since 2012)

  • Brenda  (Regular JFA Volunteer since 2011)

"Dear Rilegh" - A forlorn young father left this letter and rose on the JFA Poll Table at Colorado State University in 2004.

TESTIMONIES OF THE EFFECTS OF ABORTION


Please Note: This blog post is a copy of the information found on our Healing After Abortion webpage. For updates to this content, click below.

"I'll never know you. I never got a chance..."

The letter and rose, shown below as a part of JFA's Stop and Think Exhibit, were originally found on a JFA Poll Table at Colorado State University in 2004.  This panel was first displayed at Colorado State University in 2016 in approximately the same location where the note was originally left.

Photo by Katherine Clark

The letter reads:

Dear Rilegh,
I will never know you
I never got a chance
But I love you so much
She was never going to tell me about you
She was going to pretend you never existed
When she told me
I was truly speechless
Iv never cryed myself to sleep before
But for the past 2 weeks
It’s the only way I’m able to sleep
Theres this void in my life now
a bottomless hurt
that I’ll never know you
you, my first child
I’ll never see you grow
I can’t bring you back
I don’t even know where you are
So I gave you a home
You’ll be with me forever
I love you so much
Your Father
Rest in Peace

Many women and men (such as the writer of this letter) deal with grief following an experience with abortion.  No matter where you currently stand on the moral question of abortion, consider these questions for a few moments:

  • How do you feel when you read this letter? Can you empathize with the writer's experience?

  • Do you know anyone who has had an experience with abortion? Have you ever asked if he/she would like to talk about it?

  • How do you think that the current US laws and social norms related to abortion affect people struggling with grief after abortion?

  • Do you believe that a father's wishes should have more weight than they currently do in an abortion decision? Why or why not?

  • The writer intended this letter for his child, but states that the mother "was going to pretend [the child] never existed." Do you believe this father really had a child? Why or why not?

  • When in development does the unborn deserve legal protection?

Share your thoughts on any of these questions in the comments section below, at our @7conversations Twitter page, or at JFA’s Instagram page in the comments section of the related post

(See also JFA's "Healing after Abortion" page for more resources for helping friends with abortion in their past.)

Get JFA’s Acclaimed Conversation Training from Anywhere! - Multiple Options Start Sept. 22

“7 Conversations” Online Workshops

New Dates Added!

  • Tuesday Mornings @ 10 AM Central:
    Sept 22-Nov 3, 2020 (7 Weeks)

  • Tuesday Nights @ 7 PM Central:
    Sept 22-Nov 3, 2020 (7 Weeks)

  • Thursday Mornings @ 10 AM Central:
    Sept 24-Nov 5, 2020 (7 Weeks)

  • Thursday Nights @ 8 PM Central:
    Sept 24-Nov 5, 2020 (7 Weeks)


What “7 Conversations” Participants are Saying

“Having been in the pro-life movement since 1980, this training is nothing like I’ve ever experienced. At our local [pregnancy] center, we are making it essential for our Client Advocates (in addition to their regular training).”

- Mike, “7 Conversations in 7 Hours” participant

“I am not an articulate person and definitely avoid anxiety-producing situations of talking to someone who might disagree with me. But because of the course and the website I now have a resource...to help me to know what to say, and most importantly how to say it.”

- Donna, "7 Conversations in 7 Hours" participant

Stephanie Gray: Featured Resources and Conversation Starters

Stephanie Gray in conversation at a JFA outreach event at Purdue University in 2017

Over the years, JFA has highlighted several resources and conversation starters featuring our friend, Stephanie Gray. Click the link above to explore and share those posts.

Stephanie Gray is an acclaimed international pro-life speaker. In 2017 she was a presenter for “Talks at Google” speaking on abortion, and in 2019 she took part in the La Ciudad de las Ideas debate about abortion in Mexico (highlights from both events appear in our featured posts, linked above). Stephanie is also the author of Love Unleashes Life. You can learn more about Stephanie’s work at www.loveunleasheslife.com.

JFA Offering Free Workshops Online - New Dates Added!

“7 CONVERSATIONS” ONLINE WORKSHOPS

NEW DATES ADDED!

7/20-8/31: Monday Nights, 8-9 PM Central

7/22-9/2: Wednesday Mornings, 10-11 AM Central

I am not an articulate person and definitely avoid anxiety-producing situations of talking to someone who might disagree with me. But because of the course and the website I now have a resource...to help me to know what to say, and most importantly how to say it.
— Donna, "7 Conversations in 7 Hours" participant