Deeper Questions

Most of my conversations on campus tend to focus specifically on abortion, the rights of unborn human beings, and how we can balance those rights with protecting and respecting a woman’s right to her body.

Rebekah speaks to a student at Texas State University in October 2022

In the midst of discussing these topics, there is often a natural segue to discuss the deeper worldview questions of why humans matter all and whether we can really know if anything is morally right or wrong. I talked to a young man I’ll call “Ethan” at Wichita State University in September, and our conversation quickly turned to these deeper questions.

He told me early in the conversation that even if abortion is killing a human being, it wouldn’t matter. I sensed this statement was coming from a complicated and maybe even painful place within him so I asked him if he thought human beings in general mattered. I asked him if he thought his life mattered. I speak with many people on campus who don’t think their life matters. If they cannot understand their own worth and value, it’s going to be even more difficult to help them understand the value and dignity of another human being they cannot see.

Ethan and I found a place to sit down, and we began talking about how we can know what is right and wrong. We discussed moral relativism, the existence of God, why humans matter, and the gospel of Jesus Christ.

He shared with me that he was gay, had many bad experiences in the church, and was bullied a lot in school. As we talked, I was able to tell him that his life does matter, and I was able to encourage him to read the gospels and get to know Jesus, the only one who can heal all our brokenness and set us free from our sin. A couple of hours later, Ethan came back as we were getting ready to leave campus, and he wanted to know if I had anything else I had wanted to share. So we sat down again, and I encouraged him a second time to seek Jesus and read His word.

Rebekah had a similar conversation with this young man Texas State University in October 2022

When Ethan came back, it reminded me of how deep the desire is in the human spirit to truly understand why we are here. Human beings matter and should be equally protected from violence and harm because they have intrinsic worth given from the Creator. Abortion is such a monumental issue in our country and around the world because people have forsaken God. They have rejected his call on their lives, and how they ought to love and treat others. When they live according to their own rules, human beings suffer. Violence and injustice become defended virtues.

When Jesus healed a demon-possessed man from the Gerasenes, he told the man to go back to his hometown and tell them how much God had done for him. (Luke 8:39) Our freedom in Christ and the healing we have received from Jesus is meant to be shared. May we always be willing and ready to go and tell people how much God has done for us.

A Living Room Conversation

By Grace Fontenot, JFA Training Specialist

PART 1:  MORALITY AND LEGALITY

“Will you talk to me about abortion?  Please just tell me about it!”  This was not what I expected to hear upon returning to my host home on a recent JFA trip.  My hosts were out on a date, and they had informed me that they would have their new babysitter staying with their kids that evening, and that she’d let me into the house.  The kids were already in bed when I knocked on the door, and their babysitter, “Heidi,” answered.  She turned out to be a sweet, friendly young woman, and a student at a local university.

Heidi and I hit it off immediately.  We began chatting, and pretty soon she asked me why I was visiting the area, so I explained to her the work that I do with Justice For All.  I told her that through speaking and mentoring, I help train pro-life advocates to defend their beliefs in a way that balances truth and love in every conversation.  She then enthusiastically said, “Will you talk to me? Will you give me one of your talks?”  I was happily surprised, and we sat down in the cozy living room where I then asked her if she’d share her thoughts on abortion.  Our conversation went something like this:

Heidi:  I believe that little life has a soul, and I don’t think it’s my place to “play God” by ending that life through abortion.  But I don’t think that I can allow my religious beliefs to limit the choices of others who don’t share them when it comes to making public policies.  So I can’t say that I think abortion should be made illegal.

Grace:  I understand your concern for the freedom of others, and not wanting to force people to live by religious standards they don’t hold.  Can I ask you a question, though?  I’ve talked to a lot of people about abortion, and I’ve noticed that people have different reasons for why they hold their views.  Why are you pro-life?

Grace in conversation in front of the Art of Life exhibit during JFA’s outreach at University of Kansas (KU) in March 2018.

Heidi:  I think because I’ve always wanted to be a mom.  My mom has always said I was born to be a mother.  I was raised pro-life, but like I said, I don’t think I can tell others that they can’t get an abortion.

Grace:  Do you believe that there are some things mentioned in the Bible, which we believe as
Christians, that also should be laws?  For example, one of the Ten Commandments is “Thou shalt not kill.”  Do you think we should make murder legal because the law against it may be influenced by a Christian belief?

Heidi:  No, of course not!  You’re right, that law makes sense for everyone even though it’s also a Christian belief.

Grace:  This may sound like a weird question to ask, but what is the definition of murder?

Heidi:  It’s when you kill an innocent person… and if abortion kills a human being, then it must be murder!

Notice how I first built common ground with Heidi.  I tried to identify with her discomfort about forcing others, by law, to comply with a belief system they don’t currently hold.  Because of this, Heidi felt heard and understood.  After I built common ground, though, I raised an example of a law that coincides with our religious beliefs, but which can clearly be legally applied to all citizens regardless of religion.  Heidi quickly recognized that outlawing abortion falls into this category.  If abortion kills an innocent human being, it is not only morally wrong, but must be legally outlawed for everyone.

PART 2:  THE UNBORN - A LIVING, HUMAN ORGANISM

Heidi began to realize that if abortion kills an innocent human being, it must be restricted legally.  This naturally took us into the next part of our conversation, in which we discussed the humanity of the unborn, biologically.  It was such a fun conversation because we were both becoming increasingly excited!  I was curious about her views on the biology of the unborn, so I decided to clarify whether or not we held the same beliefs on that subject.  My hope in asking these questions was to make her more confident in her position against abortion.

Grace:  I remember you mentioning earlier the word “life,” and I’m curious, what does the word “life” mean for you?  You may have noticed I ask for definitions pretty often, and that’s because, over time, I’ve realized that people can have different intended definitions for the same words.

Heidi:  Oh, okay.  Well, actually, I was just studying this!  [Heidi excitedly took out her course notes to reference them.]  When I say “life,” I think I mean development.  I’m in a developmental motor skills class, and I was just reading about how, from the moment that fertilization is completed, development is happening!

Grace:  So if the unborn is developing from the point of fertilization, would you agree that it must be alive?

Heidi:  Yes.

Grace:  Would you further agree with me that, because living things reproduce after their own kind, the unborn must also be human?

Heidi:  Yes.

Grace:  And do you agree that the unborn is a whole organism?

Heidi:  I... think so…

She said this slowly.  I could tell she wasn’t sure what I meant, so I asked a follow-up question to clarify terms and to make sure that Heidi and I were on the same page.

Grace:  What do you mean when you use the word “organism”?

Heidi:  Hmmm.  I don’t know exactly.  What is the definition of the word “organism”?

Grace:  I can’t give you the exact definition off of the top of my head, but an organism is an individual life form.  For example, the leaf of the plant on the table next to you is a part of the whole organism, which is the plant.  In the same way, your thumb is a part of your body; but you, Heidi, are the whole organism.  So in the same way, sperm and egg are functional parts of a man and a woman.  However, when they combine, they cease being parts of another person’s body, and a new whole organism comes into existence, on its own self-directed path of development.  Does that make sense?  (Note: See our Extending Your Learning page to read Maureen Condic's excellent article on this topic, “Life: Defining the Beginning by the End.”)

Heidi:  Yes! So the unborn is the same kind of thing that we are;  it’s just at a different stage of development!

We were then interrupted by one of the kids coming downstairs complaining of a sore throat.  After administering medicine and sending him back up to bed, Heidi and I continued our conversation. 

Notice that instead of simply telling Heidi that she had a misunderstanding about the biology of the unborn, I asked her questions so that I could think through it alongside her.  In Justice For All’s Abortion: from Debate to Dialogue seminar, I help to train participants to dialogue about the biological humanity of the unborn.  One way that we do this is through a tool developed by Steve Wagner.  This tool can be said in ten seconds (below), or broken down more slowly in a conversation, as exemplified in my dialogue with Heidi.

Steve calls this the 10-Second Pro-life Apologist.  Here’s how it goes:

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

• And if it has human parents, isn’t it human?

• And living humans, or human beings like you and me, are valuable, aren’t they?

I want to encourage you to have your own conversations about abortion, and remember that it doesn’t take years of study and experience to ask thought-provoking questions, to listen, and to point out areas of agreement.  It is helpful, however, to have a little bit of knowledge of the biological development of the unborn, so that you can refer to it as I did in my conversation with Heidi.  To help you further defend the biological humanity of the unborn, I’ve listed bullet points from the interactive guide participants use in our seminar.

EVIDENCE THAT THE UNBORN IS A LIVING, HUMAN ORGANISM:

1.  The unborn is living.

• Growth through cellular reproduction

• Reacting to stimuli

• Metabolizing food for energy

2.  The unborn is human.

• Has human parents (living things reproduce after their own kind)

• Has a DNA fingerprint unique to the human species

3.  The unborn is a whole organism.

• Integrating its body parts for the good of the whole

• Actively developing itself through the stages of human development

• If adults are organisms, and all that was added to them from fertilization was a proper environment and adequate nutrition, then the unborn at fertilization must have been an organism as well.

PART 3:  HUMAN EQUALITY AND WOMEN'S RIGHTS

When I last wrote, I paused the story when one of the kids whom Heidi was babysitting complained of a sore throat.  After helping him and sending him back to bed, Heidi and I continued our conversation:

Heidi:  One of my main concerns is that I live in a city that is very liberal, and being pro-life is not popular.  I don’t want to be considered…

Grace:  Anti-woman?

Heidi:  Yeah! 

Her eyes widened.  It seemed to be a comfort that I understood why she felt torn.  I then asked her if she would like for me to explain to her the reasons I can call myself a feminist and a pro-life advocate.  “I would love it if you would,” she replied with a big smile stretching across her face. 

I then shared with Heidi the Equal Rights Argument*, a series of questions that can help someone to understand that equal rights can only be based on something that we all share equally, and the thing we share equally that best explains our equal rights is our common humanity.

Grace:  Let’s take a step away from the topic of abortion for a moment.  Do you agree that all born human beings deserve equal treatment?  If you agree that we deserve to be treated equally, then there must be something equal or the same about us, right?  So what is the same about us that demands our equal treatment?

Heidi:  It’s that we’re human!  I think I know where you’re going with this!

Grace discusses equal rights with a pro-choice student next to the art table at JFA’s outreach to the University of Kansas in March 2018.

Grace:  Yes, you’re right!  See, the reason that racism and sexism are wrong is because we all deserve to be treated equally based on our common humanity; so, if the unborn are also human like we are, they have to be included in the group of beings that have equal rights. 

Now let’s turn to feminism.  If I claim that I deserve equal rights as a woman because I am equally human to men, but then I turn around and say that I also deserve the right to end the life of someone else who is equally human to me through abortion, then I would be betraying the foundation of my feminist beliefs.  So it actually makes more sense to be a pro-life feminist than it does to be a pro-choice one!

Heidi:  That’s so helpful!  Feminism is such a big deal right now, and I’m a woman!  I don’t want to be accused of being anti-woman, but I also don’t want to have to sacrifice my pro-life beliefs.  Thank you so much for discussing this with me.

Before heading upstairs to my room for the evening, I decided to ask Heidi if the conversation had impacted her views on abortion in any way.   In the same fashion as she had handled the entire conversation, Heidi took time to think carefully before replying.  She paused and then shared an incredibly encouraging answer:

Heidi:  I grew up in a very conservative town.  I remember ignoring any conversation about politics because my dad and my friends’ dads would talk about politics constantly.  But now, I feel as though I need to be more informed about politics so that I can start voting and form my own opinions on different political subjects.  I feel so excited because, since talking to you, I feel like I know the reasons why I believe what I believe about abortion.  I feel confident now that I can share them, and I can participate in conversations about the topic because the reasons backing up my position are sound.

Heidi and I had a fantastic conversation, covering almost every topic in JFA’s Abortion: From Debate to Dialogue seminars.  I’m so thankful that we were able to talk that evening because now Heidi feels equipped to share her views with those within her sphere of influence.  She told me at the end of our conversation that she leads a Bible study on her campus for freshman girls, and that she hopes to have a conversation with them about unplanned pregnancy and abortion in the future. 

You never know how far one conversation can go, and you never know how many people it can impact. This is a perfect example of starting conversations about abortion in everyday life. For multiple conversation starter ideas, see the JFA blog. Here’s one example: You could start a conversation with a friend by sharing JFA’s social media post titled, “Can She Embrace Both?”  The idea of starting a conversation may seem intimidating, but if we are truly serious about protecting mothers, fathers, and babies from abortion, then a little bit of awkwardness is a small sacrifice to pay.

---

*EQUAL RIGHTS ARGUMENT

• Do you agree that we all deserve equal treatment, at least regarding the basic right to life?

• If we deserve to be treated equally, doesn’t that mean there has to be something the same about us?

• What is the same about us?

Click here for more examples of the Equal Rights Argument in action.

Why I Love Siberians

August 2017

Letter from Steve Wagner, Executive Director

Norman and John wandered near our “Should Abortion Remain Legal?” poll table at Wichita State University, so I struck up a conversation with them.  Norman did most of the talking.  He was a self-proclaimed nihilist who believed no one can know what’s true for someone else about morality.  As I explored with Norman his particular views about knowledge, he admitted they also entailed that no one can know what’s true regarding science or the five senses.  He even declared that there was no reality about truth or morality. 

Norman and I discussed how our different views of knowledge also affected our views of how we should treat the unborn.  John mostly listened.  Finally, Zachary, the JFA volunteer we featured in fall 2016, engaged Norman in conversation.  This gave John and me the space to have a conversation for about ten minutes.  Those ten minutes with John were worth the sweat I had poured into the previous eighty with Norman.

I briefly described to John a case for the pro-life position, centered on a simple observation about how you and I got to where we are now.  From fertilization onward, all that’s been added to us is food.  One might note also that time elapsed and that we needed a certain environment to continue living, but there has not been any essential change of our nature.  There hasn’t even been any insertion of new DNA.  We are actively developing ourselves from within, and we have been doing this since the time of fertilization.  Indeed, if we are the sort of being now with fundamental human rights, then we must have been that same sort of being with fundamental human rights from the time we began to exist, at fertilization.  It is difficult, in any case, to conceive of how we could have gained something durable like human rights by eating.

John and I looked at the pictures of humans throughout development as we discussed these things.  At one point he shared that as an elementary education major he has an immediate appreciation for children.  “I’m just not drawn to the embryo, though, in the same way I’m drawn to infants and children.”  He meant that he didn’t feel affection for the embryo, that he didn’t connect with the embryo as a child.  This was especially true for the embryo early in development, a tiny being who doesn’t look much like us at all.

“I understand...I feel the same way,” I said.  “I don’t identify with the early embryo.  Take the picture of the embryo at implantation.  It looks like an orange with fungus on it.  I’m not naturally tempted to put this picture on my wall and say, ‘Behold the child!’  That’s the reality of my feelings about the embryo.  I don’t naturally have any affection for it.  But then I have to look at the facts about the embryo: It is a living human organism, and since it shares my human nature, wouldn’t it have the same human rights I have?  It’s a very young human, so wouldn’t I call it a child?  Reflecting on these things moves me to work to bring my affections into alignment with the facts.”

I love Siberians not because I have a natural affection or concern for them, but because of the facts.  The fact that they are human beings compels me to work to bring my natural affections in line with the facts. 
It’s the same with the embryo.

Searching for a parallel example to share with John, I said, “I don’t know anyone from Siberia.  In fact, it’s worse: I don’t even really know anything at all about Siberia.  I just know it’s that really cold place up in the northeast “corner” of what used to be called the USSR.  I have never met a Siberian, and I don’t know what Siberians look like.  I don’t even know if they would want to be called Siberians or if that term would offend them.  Consequently, I don’t have a lot of natural concern for Siberians.  As I reflect on Siberians, though, and as I consider what US policy should be regarding Siberia and its inhabitants, I have to bring my affections (or lack of affections) into closer alignment to the facts.  I have to re-train my feelings and affections to “see” the Siberian as an equal to me, even though I’ve never met one.

In this discussion of the embryo and the Siberian, I wanted to give voice to John’s (and my) feelings about the embryo, since they are normal and natural, but I also wanted to point out that our lack of sympathetic feelings about the embryo doesn’t constitute a good reason to think the embryo doesn’t have rights or value.  I also wanted to suggest the virtuous way to handle the matter: seek to train our feelings to fit the facts.

John seemed genuinely interested.  He said that he appreciated learning about the topic.  He had a gentle way about him, a spirit of inquiry that was refreshing.  As we closed up our outreach for the day, we watched as Zack accompanied both Norman and John to the student union.  Let’s pray for more conversations among the three of them, but let’s especially pray for John, that God will help him think carefully about all of these things. 

POSTSCRIPT:

WAS MY CONVERSATION WITH NORMAN WORTH 80 MINUTES?

“Should I keep talking to Norman?” I asked myself after feeling like I was “beating my head against a wall” for a half hour.  No matter how many questions and hard-to-swallow implications I could bring to the table, it seemed like nothing would help Norman see that we can know some things about both science and morality. 

To make matters worse, since John was contemplative, he could barely get a word in edgewise.  Every time he opened his mouth, Norman would cut in and interpret for him.  “This is what John means, and that affirms what I just said a minute ago…” and then Norman would continue on.  I would stop Norman and say, “No, I really want to hear what John thinks.”  Every time I redirected things to John, though, he would say a few words, then pause, thinking things through.  This gave Norman an opening to redirect things back to himself.

If the conversation with Norman hadn’t led to my conversation with John (described in this month’s letter), would it have been worth it?  Listening to someone like Norman is worthwhile on its face, since he is a human being with intrinsic value, but this principle doesn’t tell me how much time I should spend with him.  I have to consider what time I have available to spend and who else may need my time.  Norman seemed completely close-minded, so perhaps I should have ended the conversation sooner.  I realized, though, that the conversation was worth having — for John’s sake.  Because Norman’s confidence might have misled John after our conversation, abandoning the conversation and leaving arguments unanswered might have harmed John.

In contrast to Norman, John seemed to have his common sense still intact.  He thought some things were actually, in reality, wrong.  He thought some things could be known to be true.  He was open-minded, but he didn’t seem easily persuaded by either Norman or me.  So my goal was simple: I sought to put Norman’s views and my views side by side so that John could see them clearly.  For example, I pointed out that my view of knowledge took rape seriously as a real moral evil and took kindness seriously as a real moral good.  Norman’s view of knowledge, on the other hand, could not take these things in any serious way to be real evils or goods.  Making opposing views clear is a modest goal you can aim for in conversations you have this month as well.

A Lesson in Love

Rebecca's Reflections, June 2017 (Part I) and July 2017 (Part II)

By Rebecca Haschke, JFA Training Specialist

PART I

Pictured above are comments written this past April on one of the Free Speech Boards at Colorado State University.  Click here to see more pictures from the CSU April 2017 event, which featured our large Stop and Think Exhibit.

A short distance away from me, three students stood, laughing loudly and verbally mocking our display.  They had just walked past our large Stop and Think Exhibit, which we had put up to create dialogue at Colorado State University in April.  Curious, they had approached our Free Speech Board (see example pictured nearby) and, after reading a few comments, began to vocally agree with others who had written in opposition to JFA.

Even after years of experience engaging students about abortion, I didn’t even have an ounce of desire to strike up a conversation with this group.  Before the students walked away, though, from somewhere deep inside I was prompted to take courage and walk over to them.  So, I went (albeit begrudgingly) and inquired:

Becca:  Hey guys, do you mind if I ask, “What are your thoughts?”

A Free Speech Board comment from the Colorado State University Stop and Think outreach.  View more photos from the CSU April 2017 event by clicking here.

Two of the students walked away as if I didn’t exist.  The third student, “Sam,” quickly turned toward me, laughed again, and sarcastically questioned me:

Sam:  You want to know what I think?  Yea-a-a-h, I’ll share my thoughts.

At that moment thoughts started floating through my mind. “I really don’t want to be in this conversation.  I wish I hadn’t engaged him.  Why am I doing this?”  I attempted to learn more about his view by asking him questions, but I was battling those negative thoughts the whole time.  As I tried to find common ground with him (even in the smallest of ways), he shared his belief that abortion should be legal for all nine months and for any reason.  When I asked whether or not he agreed with sex-selection abortion, his response indicated that, yes, indeed he did. 

After all my attempts to find common ground, I ended up empty-handed.  His mocking demeanor continued and eventually a more complete picture of his view emerged.  It was something like this: 

A Free Speech Board comment from the Colorado State University Stop and Think outreach.  View more photos from the CSU April 2017 event by clicking here.

Sam (paraphrased):  Even if a woman wants to kill a child after it is born it really doesn’t matter.  Although US law doesn’t currently reflect this, in reality nothing has value.  Even born humans don’t matter.  The only value that exists is the value that we as individuals assign to a particular object or being.  So if a woman doesn’t think a two-year-old is valuable, for her it doesn’t really matter if she kills her child.

Because of Sam’s demeanor, I felt that attempting to challenge his beliefs would have been done in vain.  I mentally prepared to exit the conversation when another thought overwhelmed my mind: “Love him, Rebecca.  Love the person he is.  Find a way to love him.”  I’ll “blame” those thoughts on the Holy Spirit.

Once again from somewhere deep inside I found the courage to try to do what I felt I had no capacity to do – love him.  At this point I didn’t know where to take the conversation about abortion, so I just asked him about him.  I remember asking,

Becca:  Have you always felt this way? 

Students stop to read a Free Speech Board at the Colorado State University Stop and Think outreach.  View more photos from the CSU April 2017 event by clicking here.

Sam:  No.  And I probably won’t always hold these views.  I grew up Catholic.  Things in life happen, and these events help form our views.  We are all searching, and our views change as we journey through life. 

Becca:  So, when did this change take place for you?

As he told his story he shared about the intellectual encounters he had had with others who are atheists, how much those encounters had influenced him, and how old he was when he started questioning God’s existence.  My next response may have been the most crucial part of the conversation.  Sam’s experience wasn’t so foreign to me, and I told him so.

Becca:  Sam, you know what?  I can relate to that.  Of course, every person’s story is different, but sometimes they have similar elements to them.  When I was 21, I studied in Mexico and met a guy from Germany named Marc.  We had many discussions about religion and the existence of God.  Marc was a very intelligent young man, and he had better answers to why he believed God didn’t exist than I had for why I believed God did exist.  When I returned home from Mexico, I had many doubts in my mind about God’s existence and what I believed.  At that point, I started a journey of searching for answers to some of those questions, too.  I can understand at some level why you have doubts.

As Sam discovered that we had genuine common ground, his demeanor changed.  He seemed to be less defensive, mocking, and condescending.  He also seemed to be appreciating the conversation as we each shared more about our personal experiences.  Little did I know that Sam was about to share something that would remind me why choosing to love him was so important in the first place. 

(To be continued in Part II below...)

Note: This story was JFA's Featured Resource for May 2017.

PART II

Tired of standing, we found a nearby place to sit down. This is where Sam shared with me that sometime in the past year he and his girlfriend had had an abortion. My heart sank. It now made sense why he had been so defensive. At that point, I asked:

Becca: Please know you don’t have to answer this if you don’t want to, but how is your girlfriend doing?

Although he attempted to hide it, I saw a deeply pained look take over his face and posture. More of their story poured out from his heart. So then I asked:

Becca: Sam, how are you doing?

He shared his story of pain, sadness, struggles with suicidal thoughts after the abortion, and much more. My heart sank again. The fact that he held the radical ideas and thoughts he had shared earlier in the conversation now made more sense to me. He may have been using these ideas as coping mechanisms as he tried to sort through the pain he was experiencing.

As I allowed him to tell more of his story, I also shared with him the stories of other men (some of whom I’ve met and others about whom I’ve read) who have lost a child to abortion. He was shocked to discover that other post-abortive men have struggled with some of the same things he had been experiencing. Tears never slid down his cheeks, but several times I was sure I saw them forming in the brims of his eyes.

Sam shared that on the day he and his girlfriend had walked into the clinic for the abortion, someone from among the pro-life crowd at the clinic threw something at the two of them. It was apparent to me that that action hurt Sam not physically, but emotionally. My heart sank yet again. The anger toward pro-life advocates that I sensed in him was now more understandable.

After over an hour had passed, he had to leave for class. As he stood up to depart, he asked if it would be alright if he gave me a hug. After the hug he pointed toward the Stop and Think Exhibit and said:

Sam: I talked with another lady at the display yesterday, too. We may not agree on everything about abortion, but the approach to what you guys are doing out here — I completely support this.

Sam then slid his sunglasses down over his eyes and walked away. I was humbled.

While reflecting on this conversation later that day, I noted that in the midst of being mocked, I had rediscovered the key to disarming hate, anger, and condescension. It’s love — not a mushy, sappy, or happy emotional feeling that many people call love, but an action that is self-sacrificial and often hurts. I’ve been taught this repeatedly throughout my life but continually seem to need reminders. My encounter with Sam was a real-life example of what love is and what it does. If I hadn’t listened to the promptings to love him, Sam would have likely continued to exhibit the hardness of heart that I had witnessed from him earlier in the conversation. Choosing to love him, even when it wasn’t enjoyable, opened a door for him to be vulnerable in a way that was unexpected — likely unexpected for both me and for Sam. Because this reminder occurred through a real-life experience — a conversation — I hope it is a lesson in love that I won’t so quickly forget.

The thoughts and feelings I experienced during this conversation made me think I should spend some time reading how St. Paul describes love in his first letter to the Corinthians so that the next time I meet a student like Sam, I may joyfully respond to him instead of begrudgingly engaging him. After reading through 1 Corinthians 13:1-8, I chose to include the excerpts below in this newsletter because each phrase reminded me specifically of my encounter with Sam.

If I speak in human and angelic tongues but do not have love, I am a resounding gong or a clashing cymbal … Love is patient, love is kind … it is not rude, it does not seek its own interests, it is not quick-tempered, it does not brood over injury, it does not rejoice over wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails.

1 Corinthians 13 (excerpts)

Until Sam knew I cared about him as a person, it did not matter how eloquently I defended the right to life of the unborn because he would have likely only heard me as a gong or a clashing cymbal. Somehow, I recognized that continuing to speak about abortion would have been in vain. Sadly, my initial thought in response to this was to abandon the conversation, which was not a reaction of patience. I’m grateful for the overwhelming thoughts that prompted me to find a way to love Sam and, in turn, prompted me to practice patience.

Even though I was begrudging the idea of continuing a conversation in which I felt mocked, disliked, and uncomfortable, the prompt to love Sam helped me to treat Sam with kindness. This prompting also gave me the strength to battle the temptations to:

• be quick-tempered and abruptly tell him how false his ideas were,

• seek my own interests by departing from this uncomfortable conversation, or

• return the rudeness that I was encountering with further rudeness.

Love bears all things. I realize now that because I was given strength to bear the mockery and condescension at the beginning of the conversation with Sam, the doors opened for him to be vulnerable enough to share his story. It’s possible that prior to my conversation with him he had never felt free to be open with someone who is pro-life.

Tears fill the brims of my eyes, too, as I think of Sam and read that love believes all things, hopes all things … Love never fails.  There are so many more thoughts and resources I want to share with Sam — but I cannot because I don’t know how to contact him.  I want him to experience healing. I desire for him to help the mother of his child heal. I desire for Sam to hear the arguments against abortion, but I want him to hear them from someone who will be gentle with him. I want to believe and have hope that these things are possible — that even while my attempt to love Sam was imperfect, God’s love for Sam will not fail.

Please join me in praying for Sam and in studying these words of St. Paul’s in order that each of us can joyfully respond, with love, to every Sam we encounter in our lives.

AFTERWORD

Please see JFA's June Resource Bulletin, which includes resources you can use to help someone like Sam who has an abortion in his or her past. In addition, the Resource Bulletin links to a letter a young man wrote to his daughter after he found out she had been aborted. He named her Rilegh. You can use that letter to help someone begin to process a past abortion experience.

From One to a Crowd

Conversations: September 2015

Phase 1

Navigating a one-on-one conversation about a controversial subject can be difficult.  Now add nine more people with varying opinions.  Is it possible for the conversation to remain productive, or at least civil?  At our University of Arizona outreach in February 2015, I watched a one-on-one conversation transform into a conversation with a crowd that lasted three hours.

“Michael” (Phase 1) approached me in order to share his view that he didn’t believe life began at conception.  Overhearing the conversation, two other students wandered over to listen in (Phase 2).  Then two more students arrived and began peppering me with their opinions and thoughts, including multiple questions related to their disagreements regarding what they had heard me discuss with Michael.

At this point there was no way to answer every student’s questions at the same time (not to mention that every response I shared prompted more questions).   In order to respect Michael, and not forget him in the midst of this developing crowd, I asked a favor of all five students.  I said something like,

Phase 2

“You are all bringing up important topics and questions to cover.  I want to answer all of them, but I want to respect each of you by doing it in an orderly fashion so that we don’t miss anything.  Here are the concerns I have heard:

• What about poverty?  What about women who don’t have the means to care for a child?

• What about women who already have too many children?

• What about a woman who has been violated (rape)?

• Women’s liberty:  Doesn’t the pro-life view violate our liberties?

• The unborn aren’t human so shouldn’t abortion only be illegal after we become human?

• Men shouldn’t have an opinion in this matter.  It’s a woman’s body. So it’s her choice.

“I need your help though.  Please help me remember each of these questions if I forget one.  If you have another question, let me know so that we can add it to the list.  I am going to start by answering one of Michael’s questions first, the one about women who don’t seem to have the financial means to care for a child.”

Phase 3

In the next three hours I witnessed something beautiful unfold.  Because each of the students knew that I thought addressing each question was important, they patiently waited their turn. As more and more students wandered over to listen in (with most of them eventually joining in) each one witnessed a particular type of conversation taking place:  It was a conversation in which disagreement was readily present but anger was absent.  People were asking questions to seek clarification.  People were actively listening to understand each other.  People where not interrupting each other.

This respectful conversation set a precedent, and this precedent caused a second beautiful response from the students.  Newcomers recognized the calm demeanor of those who disagreed with me and quickly followed suit.  So much so, that they would even raise their hands (see Phase 3 above) and wait for me to call on them before sharing thoughts or asking questions.

At one point in the conversation I was able to ask the students present how they felt after the past hour of conversation.  One of the students had changed his mind about when we are biologically human.  Another student felt that abortion should still be legal but not in as many cases as she had originally thought.  A third student commented that, although she was still pro-choice, she had never heard these pro-life arguments and they made sense.  Later that day a fourth student returned to tell me that although he is pro-life he had never witnessed a conversation about abortion like that one.  He was amazed by the response of the students.

One pro-choice student who joined the group conversation had spent two hours in conversation with me the day prior.  During the group discussion he responded to several of the pro-choice arguments using the same pro-life responses I had shared with him the day before.  Although he stated he was still pro-choice, it was clear that he now also saw the validity in some of the arguments I had proposed to him.

Thank you for helping JFA turn the debate about abortion into a productive dialogue by respecting the dignity of the unborn while also respecting the dignity of each person in the conversation.