Registration for Camp Joshua is Open!

Registration for our second annual Camp Joshua, held at the Short Journey Retreat Center in Smithfield, is now open!

What is Camp Joshua? Quite simply, an exciting pro-life weekend camp for high school students! At Camp Joshua, we train teens to be pro-life leaders now and in the future. We know that college-age women are the largest demographic receiving abortions, and it's essential that we teach our teens what being pro-life means, why being pro-life is important, and how they can be effective pro-life leaders in their communities. In short, they need to be able to defend their pro-life beliefs. 

Our goal is to teach the basic facts of pro-life issues like abortion and euthanasia, as well as the skills to communicate these facts well. As our website says, "Just as Joshua brought down the walls of Jericho, the young men and women of Camp Joshua will lead their generation in bringing down the walls of the culture of death. They will be Be Joshua to our world in need." 

So what can you do to help these young leaders-in-training?

• Promote! Do you attend a school, church, or homeschool group that would be willing to send students to Camp Joshua? Promoting our camp in your community is a great way to help us expand this awesome program. We can provide posters, flyers, and even a speaker!
  
• Attend! Send your teens to Camp Joshua! They'll learn a lot, make new friends, and have a wonderful time. We're also in need of college-aged volunteers to help as counselors at the camp.
  
• Donate! Unfortunately, camps don't run themselves, and your generous donations ensure that we can continue this program now and in the future. All funds raised go towards student scholarships, basic materials like binders and T-shirts, and overhead administrative expenses. 

If you have any questions about Camp Joshua, our mission, the camp schedule, or how to be more involved, please don't hesitate to contact Erin at ncrtl.erin@gmail.com. 

Camp Joshua 2014 will be July 18-20 in Smithfield, NC. Cost is $95 per student, which includes food and lodging, materials, and a T-shirt. 

Academy Deadline Extended!

It's not too late! College students interested in receiving an outstanding education from the leaders of the pro-life movement still have time to apply to the National Right to Life Academy.

The NRL Academy is a five week summer program located in Washington, D.C., at National Right to Life's headquarters. Students spend their days studying with the country's experts on abortion, euthanasia, and
medical ethics; by completing the course, students can earn three college credits through the Franciscan University of Steubenville's Human Life Studies program. 

Although the Academy's curriculum is challenging, the summer is not without fun! Attendees have ample time in the evenings and on the weekends to explore the city and visit its many attractions. Best of all? You're guaranteed to make solid pro-life friendships with people from all over the country. 

North Carolina has had the privilege of sending a total of five students to the NRL Academy since its founding in 2007. This is, in part, due to the Scholarship for Life, a full-tuition scholarship for one NC student each year. 

Still need convincing? Here's what some of our graduates have to say about the Academy:

"This summer has reaffirmed and strengthened my knowledge and hope of the pr-life movement. I have made connections that I will cherish for a lifetime. I am truly blessed to be chosen to this lifetime opportunity." -Will Moore, 2013

"The Academy has made me more aware of how much we have accomplished in the movement and how much work that needs to be done. It renewed my enthusiasm to protect the vulnerable among us." -Teresa Pincus, 2012

"My five weeks at the Academy gave me a greatly expanded knowledge about various life issues, but more importantly, I learned how to effectively implement that knowledge by practicing lobbying, debating, and giving speeches. I still use these important skills in discussions today.... The Academy is a place where pro-life students can meet each other and form lasting friendships in support for life." -Sarah Urdzik, 2012 

To apply to the Academy, simply send in the form found here. Then, fill out the Scholarship for Life application and inform our office of your interest in attending the Academy. 

It's That Time of Year Again!

The National Right to Life Academy is once again accepting applications! If you are a college student interested in a summer in Washington, D.C. and a life-changing pro-life education, this is for you! 

What is the Academy? From the website: 

The National Right to Life Academy is a unique, five-week academic summer course for college students who are eager to put their pro-life passion to work. Students have the opportunity to earn 3 college credits through the Human Life Studies Program from the Franciscan University of Steubenville.

$3600 tuition includes lodging at a university residence in downtown Washington, D.C., registration, room and board at the 2014 National Right to Life Convention in Louisville, Kentucky, and five weeks of the most comprehensive pro-life education around

If you're looking at the tuition cost and thinking, "I could never afford that," that's okay. Every year, North Carolina Right to Life offers the Scholarship for Life, which covers tuition for one student. When you apply to the Right to Life Academy, contact our office and let us know you're interested. We'll be happy to work with you through the application process. 

Since 2007, five students have represented North Carolina at the Academy. Their enthusiasm for the Academy is unparalleled, and if you'd like a student's perspective of the program, check out what they have to say here. 

Applications for the Summer 2014 course are due by March 15th, so hurry and apply today!

Guest Post: NCSU Students for Life

**Thanks to Teresa Pincus, president of NCSU Students for Life, for submitting this post!**

This past semester has certainly been an eventful one for our pro-life group on campus despite the usual business of obtaining a college degree and the difficulties associated with it. Students for Life started the semester with a bang by participating in recruitment fairs to promote our message and our club. We were able to meet many people and had some good discussions.

Our first impactful activity was participating in National Pro-life Chalk Day. We wrote loving, truthful messages around the more populated spots on campus.  The next day, we were in for a surprise. Our messages were defaced in support of “women’s choice.”  The same tired rhetoric of bodily autonomy and scare tactics of illegal abortions where used to justify the dismemberment of tiny human beings. No one cared to address the issue at hand. The abortion is the intent to kill human beings at early stages of development

 As the semester progressed, we held some meetings that discussed the pro-life movement and reviewed pro-life arguments. Then, we were invited to join pro-lifers around the state at the North Carolina Right to Life Banquet.  There, we had the pleasure to meet Lt. Governor Dan Forrest and Carol Tobias, the President of National Right to Life Committee.  Both of these great pro-life leaders inspired us to continue to be unapologetic voices for those who cannot speak for themselves. It was a great opportunity to mingle and connect with the pro-life community in North Carolina.

Soon, the pro-life month of October was upon us. This month is very busy for us and the pro-life movement. We participated in the national campaigns of Life Chain, Pro-life Day of Silent Solidarity, and 40 Days for Life. Also, we volunteered to run the NC Right to Life education booth at the state fair. At the booth, we were able to talk to people and raise awareness about the humanity of the unborn. The best part was watching children marvel at the tiny babies in the fetal development display.

One of the biggest events we held on campus was the Planned Parenthood Project. We borrowed a display from Students for Life of America that described how Planned Parenthood profits from the most vulnerable people of society: unborn children. Along with the signs, we set up roughly 915 crosses that represented the 915 lives that Planned Parenthood takes daily.

While the weather was anything but ideal (note the umbrellas), we still made waves on campus. Some students who stopped by learned that Planned Parenthood performs abortions, a fact that they did not previously know. Some stopped by just to spew profanities. A few stopped to have a dialogue with us and others stopped by in support of this project. Not only were people upset about our group being vocal about our pro-life beliefs, but they were upset that we were exposing truth about Planned Parenthood.  Planned Parenthood only cares about its bottom line and not women. 

To end the semester, we held our first ever diaper drive.  These diapers were donated to the Gabriel Project, who helps parents with young children. We are proud to support the Gabriel Project because not only do we care about children in utero, but we care about children’s wellbeing once they are born.

It is very important for us to engage in many of the different aspects of the pro-life movement, not only on our campus, but in our community. The movement is so diverse that there is a place for everyone. By exposing ourselves to the variety of approaches the movement takes, we can find our niche and work to further advance the culture of life. If you are a student at NC State or intend to become a part of the Wolfpack in the fall, I encourage you to get in touch with us or follow us on Facebook.  We have accomplished so much and we look forward to the following semester of activism. 

Euthanasia: Why Not?

While the cultural battle rages most obviously around abortion, another threat to human dignity, euthanasia, has been in the background for decades. And while many will concede that the killing of an innocent child is morally questionable, they might disagree when it comes to euthanasia. After all, isn’t it more compassionate to allow someone to avoid the pain, embarrassment, and drawn-out suffering that old age so often brings? And aren’t those of us who want to force Grandma to live against her will somehow doing something inhumane? For Christians, it may be most natural to respond that only God may choose when we die and that people have dignity at every age, but with the average secular American, this tactic won’t work.

Fortunately, there are intelligent ways to argue against euthanasia without resorting to religious beliefs, and the easiest way to learn them is to divide the arguments into two categories: autonomy and quality of life.

The basic premise of the autonomy argument is that people should have the right to decide when they want to die. Proponents of euthanasia want laws allowing the elderly and terminally ill to have this option, but it’s impossible to limit this “right” to only certain people. What if an eighteen year old has been dumped by her boyfriend and decides that life is no longer worth living? Most people would agree that this is no reason to allow her to kill herself, but a law preventing such cases could be challenged on the basis of discrimination. In the Netherlands, for example, euthanasia was once limited to the terminally ill; today, children as young as twelve may legally seek assisted suicide, and doctors have more power over their patients’ lives than ever before.

Another way to address autonomy is to explain how those seeking suicide are never truly autonomous. Two separate studies, one conducted in Missouri and the other in Great Britain, found that of those considering suicide, 93% suffered from a mental disorder that impaired rational decision making. Another study discovered that of the terminally ill, 24% expressed a desire for assisted suicide, but of that 24%, every single patient had a mental disorder. In other words, in the overwhelming majority of cases, depression or another mental disorder, not the illness itself, caused suicidal thoughts, and mental illnesses are treated separately. Remember, too, that it’s terrible to assume that because someone is terminally ill, they should want to die. Most people who receive a terminal diagnosis are sad because they want to continue living.

This brings us to the quality of life arguments. These are harder to argue because they are much more personal; people are concerned about living in pain, facing a life of disability, or being a burden upon a loved one. What most people don’t realize is that we have the ability to control pain in up to 99% of cases. Too often, however, doctors and nurses do not receive adequate education in pain management, leaving them helpless or unsure of themselves when their patients are suffering. Instead of focusing on euthanasia, we should work for greater education in pain management so that healthcare providers at a clinical level can use it. After all, killing someone in pain does not solve the problem of pain, and we shouldn’t solve problems by killing people.

Also within the quality of life category is the disability argument; in our culture, it is far too commonly assumed that because someone has a disability, that person’s life is not worth living. Besides being incredibly discriminatory, this is just wrong, and certainly not compassionate or respectful. Allowing a disability exception within euthanasia laws just says that anyone who doesn’t meet our standards is disposable. A better response is to work as a society to be more accommodating; for example, we already require new buildings to be handicap accessible, indicating that we value people in wheelchairs despite their inability to walk. Many people with disabilities will tell you that they only feel different when other people treat them that way. Somehow, I suspect that being told they qualify for assisted suicide isn’t what they have in mind when it comes to equality.

Finally, people are frequently concerned about dying alone or being a burden on their loved ones. However, telling the elderly that we will be “compassionate” and allow them to die is actually confirming their fears of being burdensome and unlovable. Instead, telling Grandma that we will care for her and love her no matter what is much more reassuring; it says that we value her as an individual, and not because she’s “useful” or self-sufficient. Caring for others and allowing ourselves to be cared for is part of the human experience, and no one could survive long without other people there to help them.

Many proponents of euthanasia may never have heard persuasive, rational arguments against it, so hearing the subject presented in this way might be the key to more fruitful discussion. For anyone seeking more information or interested in learning where these studies come from, National Right to Life has an excellent series of articles on euthanasia (found here), as well as other issues of medical ethics.

 (A version of this article was first published on Ignitum Today)

Pro-Life 101: Final Thoughts

*This is the seventh and final installment in a series of posts on pro-life apologetics based on the “When They Say, You Say” talks developed by Olivia Gans Turner and Mary Spaulding Balch. While reading in order is not strictly necessary, you may find it helpful. Post 1. Post 2. Post 3.  Post 4. Post 5. Post 6. 

Over the last couple months, we've broken down the pro-abortion arguments into five categories and discussed how to address each one. We've also talked about how language influences what we say. Today we'll wrap up our Pro-Life 101 series with a few more thoughts.

While the main arguments fall into the five categories already mentioned, sometimes people will slip into a sixth....the ad hominem attack! When there's nothing left to say, you will become the target. The following are some common ones:

You're a man. 

You're too old to have children.

How many children have you adopted?

Remember, abortion is a human rights issue. It doesn't matter if you're an older man who's never had children--you have a right to speak up for your fellow humans! Always go back to your basic talking points, that life begins at conception and that mothers deserve better care than abortion. 

Your conversation may not change someone else's mind, but you never know what seeds you may plant or who else may be listening. And of course, your words are only a small part of what it means to be pro-life. More than anything else, the witness of your life, the things you do with it, will change the world. 

Pro-Life 101: The Hard Cases

*This is the sixth installment in a series of posts on pro-life apologetics based on the “When They Say, You Say” talks developed by Olivia Gans Turner and Mary Spaulding Balch. While reading in order is not strictly necessary, you may find it helpful. Post 1. Post 2. Post 3.  Post 4. Post 5.

Rape. Incest. Fetal Abnormality. These constitute what we call “the hard cases,” because they are incredibly personal and emotionally charged. Many people are afraid to talk about them, but you shouldn’t be. Discussing the hard cases requires compassion, sensitivity, and reason, just like everything we’ve talked about so far.

Abortion advocates often bring up the hard cases because they know they carry emotional weight and tend to shake up their pro-life peers. Even those who are otherwise pro-life hesitate when it comes to abortion in the case of rape and incest.

When you look at the statistics, though, you’ll notice that the vast majority of abortions aren’t for the hard cases at all; in fact, rape and incest account for less than 1% of all abortions. In total, rape, incest, life of the mother, and fetal abnormality are the reasons given for only 7% of abortions. It is very important not to downplay the tragedy behind these statistics. You should bring this up to illustrate that there is not an overwhelming need for abortion in these circumstances, but be careful: you cannot reduce the suffering of rape victims to a small statistic in the abortion debate.

So what do we say about abortion in the case of rape? First, remember that rape is a disgusting, violent crime. Whatever you do, start by acknowledging the woman’s pain; she is the innocent victim of a terrible ordeal, and she needs your love, compassion, and support, not your judgment. Pro-lifers are (falsely) accused of caring more about the baby than the mother, and you want to avoid that.  However, when rape results in pregnancy, a second innocent victim is at stake.

Too often, when a woman conceives after rape, counselors encourage her to abort her baby. On the surface, this seems like a reasonable solution since she was forced into her situation. Upon closer analysis, however, this line of reasoning falls apart. Regardless of how he was conceived, the baby is still a unique, innocent human life. Abortion is a death sentence, but it punishes the child for the crime of his father. We forget that the child has two parents—he is also his mother’s, and when we pressure her to abort, we turn her into the aggressor against her own child. Rape victims are already traumatized, and women who have abortions often suffer emotionally, physically, and psychologically for the rest of their lives. When a woman  is pressured into abortion after being raped, then, she often feels like she has been victimized twice.

In the case of incest, which almost always involves the abuse of a minor by an older relative or family friend, abortion not only takes an innocent life and further traumatizes the mother, it also shields the criminal. He pays for his victim’s abortion and resumes his abuse, unbeknownst to those who would protect her. In this way, abortion allows the cycle of abuse to continue, and, again, only adds to the mother’s pain.

But won’t carrying her child to term only distress the mother further? We often hear that women who are pregnant after rape will relive their rape every day. However, studies have shown that women who continue their pregnancies after rape actually heal better than those who abort. Rather than trying to cover up her experience as something shameful, she is able to cope with it in an open, healthy manner. Like grieving, recovering from a rape is a process that takes time. Women reported that although they were afraid at first, in the end they felt that giving life to their child was a special way of redeeming their horrible experience. Instead of compounding the violence of the rape with an abortion, they brought something good and beautiful to the world.

Just as a child conceived in rape has the same dignity, value, and right to life as a “planned” child, so does a baby diagnosed with fetal abnormalities. It’s never easy for parents to hear that their very much wanted baby might have a lifelong disability or perhaps not survive outside the womb, but this does not make abortion the acceptable solution.

We should never judge the worth of a life based upon an arbitrary standard of “quality.” All lives are unique and valuable, and to say otherwise is to establish a dangerous precedent that opens the door to euthanasia. If we say that babies in the womb should be aborted due to disabilities, what’s to prevent us from extending that principle to those outside the womb with disabilities? Modern technology has made it much easier to accurately diagnose problems before birth, but sadly our medical professionals often use this as a means of advocating the abortion of these “less than perfect” children instead of using it as an opportunity to better equip themselves to care for those children’s medical needs.

Even when parents receive a fatal prenatal diagnosis, we know that it’s better for them to continue their pregnancies, just like those pregnant through rape. Many times, parents are excited about their baby and have already picked out names and planned for their future with their baby when they receive the diagnosis. They’re already grieving the life of their baby…before their baby has died. Abortion, rather than acknowledging that baby as a valued family member, turns him into a problem that must be destroyed. In contrast, those with experience at perinatal hospices know that treating the baby as a valuable human being, regardless of how long he lives, brings much greater peace and healing to his family. Families are able to celebrate their newest member’s brief life and are allowed to grieve naturally. Their baby isn’t treated as a problem, but as a blessing.

These cases are all difficult and entail much suffering, but abortion only adds to that suffering. Sympathy, compassion, and love are needed when we talk about them, but so are facts. No matter how a baby is conceived and no matter what disabilities he may have, he is still a unique human life, as fully worthy of our protection and love as his parents.  

Pro-Life 101: Back-alley Abortions

*This is the fifth installment in a series of posts on pro-life apologetics based on the “When They Say, You Say” talks developed by Olivia Gans Turner and Mary Spaulding Balch. While reading in order is not strictly necessary, you may find it helpful. Post 1. Post 2. Post 3.  Post 4.

Abortion advocates often state that if abortions were difficult to obtain or illegal, thousands of women would die or be horrifically maimed in back-alley abortions. They even insist that abortion is safer than childbirth and much less painful. These arguments can be intimidating because they rely, to an extent, upon statistics. No worries! We’ve broken down some basic facts to get you started.

Really?

First, let’s look at the claim that thousands of women will die because of unsafe illegal abortions. Did you know that in 1972, a year before abortion on demand was legal, the Center for Disease Control reported only 39 maternal deaths from illegal abortions? While it’s truly sad that these mothers and their children died in such a horrific way, this statistic doesn’t even come close to the thousands of deaths that abortion advocates talk about.

Furthermore, illegal abortion-related deaths were rare because by the 1960s, most abortions were performed by physicians (yes, even though it was illegal) and medical technology had improved enough to prevent or treat many problems that previously would have been deadly—including complications from childbirth and basic illnesses like the flu. In 1960, Dr. Mary Calderone, former director of Planned Parenthood, wrote “Abortion, whether therapeutic or illegal, is in the main no longer dangerous, because it is being done well by physicians.” In other words, so long as women did not attempt self-induced abortions, their risk of death was relatively low, even 13 years before Roe.

But what about that “5,000-10,000 deaths” figure we always hear about? Simply put, it was a fabricated statistic. In his 1979 book Aborting America, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, former director of NARAL, wrote “I confess that I knew that the figures were totally false and I suppose that others did too if they stopped to think of it. But in the ‘morality’ of our revolution, it was a useful figure, widely accepted, so why go out of our way to correct it with honest statistics?” As already mentioned, a look at the true figures demonstrates the truth in Dr. Nathanson’s words: relatively few women died from illegal abortions.

Of course, just because thousands of women didn’t die from abortion doesn’t mean abortion is ever “safe.” After all, at the end of every abortion is a dead baby, and many post-abortive mothers suffer from physical, emotional, and psychological complications. We know, too, that even though abortion is widely available and medical technology better than ever before, women still die during abortions, even legal ones. A quick Google search brings up the tragic stories of Tonya Reaves and Jennifer Morbelli, two young women who died after botched legal abortions performed by licensed physicians.

Another point, too, is that many expectant mothers seek abortions because they can. Since abortion is legal, these vulnerable women rationalize that “it’s legal so it must be okay,” even if they know they are taking the life of a child. How many mothers facing unplanned pregnancies opt for abortion just because it’s the fast and “easy” solution to their problem? How many of those mothers would consider abortion if it wasn’t legal and, to an extent, accepted in the United States? Within ten years of Roe, the number of abortions per year shot up from 744,600 (1973) to over 1.5 million. Today, that number has leveled at about 1.2 million abortions per year, but many post-abortive mothers will say that they only had an abortion because it felt like their only choice.

Sometimes abortion advocates will try to make the case that “safe” abortions reduce maternal mortality rates. Fortunately, studies show that it’s not the availability of abortion that saves mothers’ lives, but better access to medicine and healthcare. In fact, countries where abortion is illegal have a lower maternal mortality rate! In the US, the maternal mortality rate actually increased from 10.3 in 1999 to 23.2 in 2009. In Chile, where abortion has been illegal since 1989, the maternal mortality rate dropped 69.2% within 14 years. Chile now has the second lowest maternal mortality rate of all the countries in North and South America. For a fascinating summary of maternal mortality figures around the world, National Right to Life has an excellent handout detailing some of these trends.

Don’t let the numbers scare you! A little research and common sense is all you need to know that abortion doesn’t save lives, it takes them. Although pregnancy and childbirth can be dangerous, they are natural functions of the female body, and with our ever-increasing medical knowledge and availability, there is no reason to believe that abortion is somehow a safety net. 

Pro-Life 101: Every Child a Wanted Child

*This is the fourth installment in a series of posts on pro-life apologetics based on the “When They Say, You Say” talks developed by Olivia Gans Turner and Mary Spaulding Balch. While reading in order is not strictly necessary, you may find it helpful. Post 1. Post 2. Post 3. 

 This third category contains responses to the social arguments for abortion. Social arguments include concerns about the ability of poor families to care for children, unwanted children, and child abuse. Oftentimes people are only repeating what they’ve heard (and have not thought through the subject well themselves), and it’s best to assume that they have good intentions. In order to win hearts to the pro-life movement, you must recognize their compassion for what it is, even if it’s misplaced or uninformed.

The main premise of social arguments is that it is in both the parents’ and the child’s best interest to abort. An unplanned pregnancy will only add to the burden of parents struggling financially. Parents who don’t want their children will be more inclined to abuse. Children born into such families will suffer poverty or abuse. And because nobody wants to increase child abuse or poverty, they look at abortion as a reasonable and even responsible solution to the problem. Our job, then, is to persuade others lovingly that while these are good concerns, their conclusion is incorrect and better solutions exist.

What exactly does the slogan “every child a wanted child” mean? At first glance, it looks great: everyone wants to be wanted and loved! But the implications are much more negative. First, this suggests that value is equated with being wanted, and we know that simply isn’t true. We set a dangerous precedent when we say that someone only has worth when she is wanted by someone. With reference to abortion, “every child a wanted child” quickly becomes “and every unwanted child aborted.” This mentality of killing anyone who isn’t “wanted” endangers everyone living. As soon as we assign value based upon an arbitrary standard, anyone who does not meet that standard is at risk.

More importantly, is any child truly unwanted? At any given time, thousands of couples are on the adoption waiting lists, hoping for a child. Even children with disabilities, who are undervalued by our culture, have families lining up to bring them home. Just this summer, for example, hundreds of couples volunteered to adopt an unborn baby whose parents were considering abortion after discovering he had Down syndrome. While adoption is a difficult decision requiring great self-sacrifice on the part of the birthmother, it has a happy ending. By making an adoption plan, a mother not only gives life to her baby, she gives life to a completely new family. The same cannot be said about abortion.

It’s also good to note that feelings about pregnancies change. It’s common for mothers to have mixed feelings when they learn they’re pregnant, but over time they begin to bond with their unborn baby, especially when they can feel him moving. Every woman has a different timeline for when she bonds with her child, and for some mothers, it might not be until after birth. Regardless of how women feel about their pregnancies, though, we need to remember that the decision to abort is a serious matter, and a temporary emotion is not enough to justify the taking of a life. Too often, expectant mothers who feel trapped into abortion live with regrets for the rest of their lives.

But what about poverty? First of all, aborting the newest member of the family will not solve the problem of poverty. Someone’s financial situation and unplanned pregnancy are two different issues, and a poor mother who has an abortion remains a poor mother, with the additional pain of knowing she killed her child. We don’t condone the arbitrary killing of poor adults, and neither should we advocate the killing of their unborn children! Even if parents don’t feel like they have the financial resources to raise a child, there is help available. Pregnancy care centers across the country exist to support women as they face difficult pregnancies, providing free care, classes, and supplies. Besides material support, the workers at pregnancy centers often form friendships with the clients, providing much-needed emotional support, as well. Unlike abortion facilities, pregnancy care centers empower women and their families with education, resources, and the tools they need to succeed. 

Despite all this, many people are concerned that if parents are “forced” to care for an “unwanted” child, the abuse rate will escalate. If that is the case, it would make sense for cases of child abuse to decrease after the Supreme Court ruled abortion on demand legal, right? Wrong. In 1973, the National Center of Child Abuse and Neglect reported 167,000 cases of child abuse. In 2011, an estimated 681,000 cases of child abuse were reported. This is in spite of increasing standards of safety, such as background checks and training for anyone working with minors, as well as approximately 1.2 million abortions per year. 

So why does the abuse rate go up with the abortion rate? One reason might be that women suffering from post-abortion syndrome are more likely to struggle to bond with or care for subsequent children. Another reason is that an abortion culture promotes a very negative view of children. Planned, wanted unborn children are babies; unplanned and unwanted unborn children are disposable clumps of tissue. When abuse takes place within the womb, we call it abortion and say it’s a woman’s choice. When abuse takes place outside of the womb, it’s a crime. Is it any wonder that as children are no longer seen as gifts within the womb, they aren’t seen as gifts outside of it, either? When children become commodities, we lose the understanding of them as persons.

Abortion has become so customary that it doesn't even occur to some people that it is part of the problem, not the solution. As pro-lifers, it is our duty to address these issues with great love. Our culture is broken and needs to be retaught the value of each person, born and unborn. 

Pro-Life 101: “A Woman Has the Right to Control Her Body”

*This is the third installment in a series of posts on pro-life apologetics based on the “When They Say, You Say” talks developed by Olivia Gans Turner and Mary Spaulding Balch. If you missed the first two, read part one here and part two here.

One of the most popular pro-abortion arguments is reproductive freedom, i.e. women have the “right” to do what they like with their bodies, including aborting their children. This line of thinking encompasses other common catchphrases such as “I’m personally opposed, but…,” “abortion is a private decision between a woman and her doctor,” and “everyone has the right to choose.”

The United States was founded on the principle of liberty, and Americans often take for granted certain rights that other people are denied, such as the freedom to vote. However, even in the United States our rights have their limits. Freedom of speech, for example, does not allow someone to shout “fire” if there isn’t one. The right to bear arms does not mean gun owners can shoot other people at random. In short, we are not free to injure or endanger another person.

How does this apply to abortion? At the most fundamental level, the unborn child is a separate person, and common sense tells us that if a baby in the womb can have a different blood type and different sex than the woman carrying him, he is a separate individual. We can’t leave the baby out of the conversation when talking about rights!   

With this series of arguments, though, it’s not enough to bring out your humanity of the unborn facts and leave it at that. You’ll need to listen to what the other person is saying and address his or her arguments more specifically. With that in mind, here are some common objections and the pro-life responses.

A woman shouldn’t be forced to carry a pregnancy.

Are women ever “forced” to be pregnant? With the exception of victims of rape and incest, who we’ll talk about in a later post, the vast majority of pregnant mothers willingly engaged in sexual activity. Since pregnancy is the natural outcome of sex, and since all contraceptives have a failure rate, every sexually active person should be aware of the possible consequence. By the time a woman finds out she’s pregnant, it’s too late. She can’t just “undo” her pregnancy, because she’s already a mother. This does not mean she’s without options or doomed to a life without an education or career, though! There are a growing number of resources available to pregnant and parenting students, and resource centers all over the country exist to help women facing unplanned pregnancies.

Remember, too, that pregnancy is a temporary condition. No one is pregnant forever, but abortion is permanent. When someone breaks her leg, doctors usually tell her to wear a cast for a couple months. Is this uncomfortable? Sure. Inconvenient? Probably. But it’s not permanent; the doctor isn’t asking her to wear a cast forever. Nor is the doctor offering to amputate the leg or kill the patient as a “quick fix” to the problem. Similarly, abortion is an extreme reaction to what is a temporary inconvenience.

It’s a private decision between a woman and her doctor.

Obviously, with this one you’re going to want to go back to the humanity of the unborn baby first, but there are a few more points to keep in mind.

First, when we give doctors the freedom to make arbitrary decisions about ending life at one stage, we’re opening the door for an overall decrease in the respect for life at any stage. The unborn are the most vulnerable members of our society, but they’re not the only ones. The disabled, elderly, and anyone else not up to the standards of “perfect” health shouldn’t have to worry about whether or not someone else is going to decide the quality of their life for them. Life is always valuable.

Second, most mothers seeking abortions don’t consult their regular doctors; they go to abortion facilities. It’s unlikely that they will have any kind of relationship with the abortionist or even know his or her name. Any information the abortionist has about the patient comes from information that she provided, not from her regular doctor. The patient may not ever even know her abortionist’s name. The truth is, the notion of abortion being a decision made between a woman and the doctor who knows her is a fallacy; in the majority of cases, it’s a brief meeting of strangers.

Women will never be equal to men without abortion.

Image Source

The ability to bear children is a gift unique to women. As long as we insist that women will “only” be equal if they kill their developing children, women will be “second class” citizens. We wouldn’t tell a black man that he can “only” be equal if he changes his skin color. Fertility is not a punishment, and a baby does not equal failure. The original feminists would be horrified to know that today’s women believe their very femininity holds them back. The day we accept the ability to grow a completely new person as a uniquely female superpower, the world will be a better place.

Some women have no other choice.

How tragic. If a mother feels like abortion is her only option, then we have failed her as a society. No one should have to believe that killing her child is the only way to keep her job, maintain a familial or romantic relationship, pursue an education, or any of the countless  reasons women feel pressured into abortion. This reasoning betrays the lie of abortion as a “choice.”

I’m personally opposed, but….

It doesn’t matter if you’re a man, woman or child. For all the reasons already listed, an opinion means very little when you consider the facts. Moreover, there have been nearly 55 million abortions in the last 40 years; whether you know it or not, someone close to you has most likely had an abortion. This issue has affected everyone.

Pro-Life 101: "It's Not Human"

*This is the second installment in a series of posts on pro-life apologetics based on the “When They Say, You Say” talks developed by Olivia Gans Turner and Mary Spaulding Balch. If you missed the first one, catch up here.

Did you know that most pro-abortion arguments fall into one of five categories? Over the next several weeks, we will be taking you through each argument and presenting some practical tips for responding well. Whether you’re a seasoned member of the pro-life movement or just a rookie, you’ll find something worth reading!

One of the arguments we hear is that an unborn child is not a human being. This may come up in one of several ways, such as, “It’s just a blob of cells,” “The fetus is only a potential human being,” and “It’s not a person; it has no meaningful life.” Thanks to modern technology, though, not only is this particular attack losing credence, it’s also easy to disprove. Let’s start with some basic facts about fetal development.

Not human? Really?!

Science tells us that from the moment of fertilization, a genetically complete, unique, individual human person exists. Although the baby may look like a clump of cells during his first few days of life, he is not just a “potential life,” he is a life! His DNA contains all the same information it will always have throughout his life. Sex, eye color, height, and his grandpa’s nose are already present; all he needs is time to grow and develop these features.

After about a week, the unborn child, now in the embryo stage, has implanted in the uterus. By the time he is 18 days old, he already has a beating heart and a visible spinal cord. His growth is rapid and almost miraculous. Within just a few weeks, he will have all the body parts he will have as an adult. In six weeks, the unborn child has grown from a single-celled person into a person with definable features and every organ system in place.

Just as an infant does not look exactly like the adult he will become, so an embryo in the early stages of development does not look exactly the way he will at birth. Who are we to say that his life is without meaning? Arguably, the infant needs as much or more care than the unborn child because both are entirely reliant upon outside help in order to survive, but there are few people who advocate for infanticide (sadly, we can no longer say that “no one” advocates for infanticide). We cannot judge a life’s worth based on arbitrary standards of quality or care; rather, we must give each life the same objective value, based simply on its merit as human life.  

It’s important to remember that the vast majority of abortions take place between the seventh and twelfth week of pregnancy—long after the babies have beating hearts and detectable brainwaves. These facts might anger some people, but you can be confident in the knowledge that what you are speaking is true and has nothing to do with opinion, ideology, or religion. “Don’t force your religion on me” falls under this category of argument because it has the same answer: No matter what you believe about the existence of God, it’s indisputable science that at fertilization, a new life comes into existence.

One of the most powerful tools we have at our disposal is the ultrasound image. Within the last several decades, the use of the ultrasound has gone from nonexistent to routine practice. As technology improves, so do the images of the unborn children. Today’s pregnant mamas can take home 4D ultrasound videos of their babies yawning, stretching, and sucking their thumbs! This is one reason why it is so important that all pregnant mothers have the chance to view an ultrasound of their baby. In your own conversations, have an ultrasound image or fetal model available to show people. “A picture is worth a thousand words,” and although your picture and words may not change minds, they may plant seeds in peoples’ hearts. 

Pro-Life 101: Using Our Language to Frame Our Arguments

"Did I really just say that?!"

Anyone familiar with the abortion debate knows the discrepancy in the language those on each side use. Even if you’re not always consciously aware of the differences, you’ve probably noticed that some people say “fetus” while others say “baby.” The language we use helps frame our arguments, and today we’re going to tell you some simple ways that your vocabulary can strengthen your pro-life witness.

You may be aware that when the mainstream media talks about the pro-life movement, they don’t say “pro-life.” At best, we are “anti-abortion,” but often we are just “anti-choice.” See what they did there? It’s that simple to turn a positive connotation into a negative one. This is just one example of how language shapes our arguments, and it illustrates just why we, as pro-lifers, need to be so careful with the words we use. Without even meaning to, what we say can work against us. For example, how often have you said “pro-choice?” Our opponents are NOT “pro-choice,” they are “pro-abortion,” and to say otherwise implies that abortion IS a choice.

Since it’s easy to get caught up in their terminology without realizing it, let’s look at some of the common words and phrases to avoid in pro-life situations, as well as other things to say instead.

First, “choice.” This otherwise harmless word is loaded when it comes to our subject. As Americans, we like being able to choose what to have for dinner, the career we want, or where to spend our vacations. “Choice” is good, right? Not when it comes to abortion. Unfortunately, the pro-abortion side has commandeered this word, and since we are not for “choice,” that makes us the bad guys. Try to use words like “option,” “decision,” or “alternative” instead. Using the word “choice” in a conversation about abortion is to adopt their language, and we want to avoid that as much as possible.

Example: Mothers facing crisis pregnancies have more options than abortion.

“Fetus.” Though this is a medical term and means “unborn young” in Latin, today our opponents use “fetus” to detract from the humanity of the unborn. Unless you are having a scientific discussion, avoid “fetus” and use words like “baby” or “unborn child” instead. When people hear the word “baby,” a clump of cells is not what they imagine.

Example: “Just six weeks after fertilization, the baby already has all the limbs and organs his adult body will. He even has detectable brain waves!”

“It.” NEVER refer to an unborn baby as “it.” It’s hard to remember to refer to a baby of unknown sex by anything else, but “it” is one word you should eliminate when referring to a human person. If necessary, pick a name for the baby. Not only does this humanize “Junior,” it also gives him a sex for you to refer to. When you’re talking about the so-called “War on Women,” consider using “her” to refer to the unborn baby; it’s a subtle reminder that the unborn women should be part of the debate, too.

Example: “At fertilization, the unborn baby is not just a clump of cells. He’s a genetically unique human person with his own DNA. All he needs is time to grow!”

“Pregnant Woman” or “Woman.” Call her a mother! After all, if you believe that life begins at fertilization (and you should), then motherhood begins at fertilization, too. This also emphasizes the baby’s role in pregnancy.

Example: “It’s tragic that mothers in crisis pregnancies feel that abortion is their only option.”

“Doctor” and “Clinic.” These words imply that abortion is just like any other medical procedure. For obvious reasons, always say “abortionist” and “abortion facility.” Don’t be afraid to call them what they are!

Example: “Every time I pray at the abortion facility, I pray that the abortionist will have a change of heart.”

Finally, “murder.” Although it’s often best to avoid euphemisms, in this case it’s better to use a more gentle word, like “killing.” Remember, expectant mothers are under a great deal of pressure to abort and are often misinformed about their baby’s development; they don’t need to feel judged by you as a murderer. Keep in mind, too, that we are portrayed as self-righteous, insensitive, and violent. Casual usage of terms like “murder” only contributes to this image.

Example: “When there are so many couples waiting to adopt, why does our culture try to persuade young mothers that killing their unborn children is their best option?”

Although there are more words that we could talk about, you get the point. Ultimately, the important thing to remember is that ANY voice for the voiceless is wonderful, but it’s good to have the tools to effectively present your side, too.

This is the first installment in a series of posts on pro-life apologetics based on the “When They Say,You Say” talks developed by Olivia Gans Turner and Mary Spaulding Balch. 

To read part 2, part 3, or part 4, click on the links!

Tales from Camp Joshua NC, Part One

What a busy few weeks it’s been! Besides all of the excitement at the legislature, NCRTL was pleased to host its first Camp Joshua July 19th-21^st, and we are finally able to tell you all about it! 

Camp Joshua was such a success, and so much fun for everyone involved! The weekend kicked off on Friday night, when the campers arrived, settled in, and got to know each other at dinner. Then they played a game of “Pro-Life Jeopardy,” which led right into their first workshop, Abortion 101. Afterwards, we had a long group discussion about abortion and fetal development. The students asked such thoughtful questions!

Some of the prize-winning posters!

Although we’d only been there for a few hours, after our discussion we were all ready for a little bit of fun. Commence the poster contest! The teens really blew us away with their enthusiasm and made more posters than we anticipated. Although it made our classroom look great when they were all hung up, it also made judging much harder, too! We gave out numerous prizes for the winning posters of categories like “Most Artistic” and “Best Message.”

On Saturday, the real work began. Because Camp Joshua is only a 48 hour weekend camp, the students have a lot to learn in a short period of time. They all did a fabulous job of staying alert, paying attention, and asking questions. We couldn’t ask for a better group! The main focus of the morning was the art of pro-life persuasion and how to effectively convey the pro-life message. Speaker Sarah Zagorski, from Louisiana Right to Life, explained how to address the questions from their most basic root: Is the unborn a living human person or not? She also shared her moving personal story about her troubled childhood in an abusive home and her eventual adoption into a loving family. She reminded students that we all have a personal story that we can use to win hearts for the pro-life cause, but it must be supplemented with sound knowledge about the life issues.

Having been equipped with the facts and tools for effective dialogue, the students took to the stage. Each team performed a skit showing off their understanding of the material they had learned. Practice is the key to mastery of a concept, and we are confident that these students have it down! One team focused on a dramatic presentation of a conversation about life outside of an abortion facility, while the other team took a more comedic approach and staged a scene at “Planned Pizzahood.” Needless to say, everyone was impressed with them both!

Team 2: Their "Planned Pizzahood" skit 
had us all giggling.

Team 1: The scarf represented this young woman's
shame and uncertainty due to her unplanned pregnancy.

We were all excited by our first Camp Joshua’s great start! As you can see, it was a busy weekend and one blog post just won’t do it justice. Click here to read Part Two, and visit our Facebook page to see more pictures from our camp!