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.