MP3 Download | 1:03:21

Josh Brahm and Emily Geiger welcome Ali Rak back to the Equipped for Life Podcast to discuss pro-life political activism, now that Roe v. Wade has been overturned. Much has changed since 2020 when Ali was last on the podcast, and the main focus of this episode includes an analysis of why the pro-life movement was caught so flat-footed after Dobbs, including the poor performance on state initiatives, the abortion lobby’s gained momentum, and the generally lackluster support from pro-life politicians.

The second half of the episode includes more practical advice from Ali on how pro-life people can effectively talk to their elected representatives, with different advice for whether their representative is in the majority or minority opinion, and how to communicate with representatives and their staff in a way that will be heard, respected, and even appreciated.

Finally, Ali implores all pro-life advocates (including you!) to reengage their activism with renewed vigor, as she reveals the grim truth that the pro-life movement needs support now more than ever.

Related Links:

EFL #56: Become an Effective Lobbyist Using These Practical Tips (with Ali Rak)

Ali’s Twitter/X:
@alirak8710

WSJ News: Trump Tells Christians ‘You Won’t Have to Vote Anymore’ if He’s Elected

Equal Rights Institute Website

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

Equipped for Life Course

Equipped for Life Academy

The post Political Activism in a Post-Roe World (w/ Ali Rak) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 59:41

Josh Brahm and Monica Snyder wrap up their series of recent discussions by addressing denial-of-care stories. In this episode, Monica and Josh define what a denial-of-care story is, explain why abortion bans are often blamed for causing pregnancy-related deaths, identify the actual problems behind the most sensationalized stories, empathize with tragic outcomes and legitimate pro-choice concerns, and propose courses of action that pro-life people can take to help prevent similar tragic stories from happening in the future.

Related Links:

California’s progress with decreasing maternal mortality

Secular Pro-Life’s entire blog category of debunking content

Adriana Smith and laws about pregnant patients on life support

Does Texas require doctors to wait until there’s no heartbeat to intervene in emergencies? (Josseli Barnica)

Kaitlyn Kash

Yeni Alvarez – New Yorker article

ProPublica can’t see malpractice, only abortion bans (Neveah Crain)

ProPublica identifies their medical experts a little too subtly

Are OBGYNs fleeing Idaho because of abortion laws?

ERI Blog Post on Adriana Smith’s case: Is It Okay to Find Edge Cases Challenging?

Equipped for Life Podcast #96: Survey Review: How Pro-Life & Pro-Choice People Define Abortion (with Monica Snyder)

Equal Rights Institute Website

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

Equipped for Life Course

Equipped for Life Academy

The post Are Women Being Denied Care? (w/ Secular Pro-Life’s Monica Snyder) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:06:08

Josh Brahm and Monica Snyder return to discuss the question: “Do You Need Religion to be Pro-Life?” The conversation touches on practical and philosophical points, including discussion about objective and subjective morality and its relationship with deism, as well as Monica’s experiences responding to both pro-life and pro-choice people who raise a scrutinizing eyebrow when they realize that they are talking with a pro-life atheist.

Related Links:

Secular Pro-Life

Secular Pro-Life: “Is belief in God necessary for the pro-life cause to succeed?”

Secular Pro-Life: “Where do atheists think human rights come from?”

A couple of examples of pro-choice religious-ish-ness:

“‘Where does life begin?’ is a spiritual question”

“We invited the child’s spirit to revisit Earth another time.”

Human Life Review: SYMPOSIUM: What’s God Got to Do with It?

“Is God Necessary for Morality?” Debate between Shelly Kagan and William Lane Craig

Pew Research Center study on religiously unaffiliated people (specifically the “Beliefs & practices” tab)

EFL Podcast on Stanford persuasion study

Retten Til Liv (Denmark Right to Life)

Equal Rights Institute Website

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

Equipped for Life Course

Equipped for Life Academy

The post Do You Need Religion to be Pro-Life? (w/ Secular Pro-Life’s Monica Snyder) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:19:04

After much anticipation, Josh Brahm FINALLY gets to interview Monica Snyder from Secular Pro-Life about her background and expertise in Forensics. Monica explains how her work in forensics and DNA analysis affects her view on the abortion issue, particularly when it comes to questions about the justice system and why we shouldn’t prosecute women who have had abortions.

Content warning: Includes discussion of forensic rape kits as well as methods of testing whether a baby was aborted instead of miscarried.

Links:

Testing biological tissue for abortion drugs

“Was the Infant Born Alive?” A Review of Postmortem Techniques Used to Determine Live Birth In Cases of Suspected Neonaticide

National Right to Life – Joint Open Letter: Criminalizing Women Who Have Abortions is Not Pro-Life

ERI Statement: Should Women Be Prosecuted for Illegal Abortions?

Secular Pro-Life

Equal Rights Institute Website

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

Equipped for Life Course

Equipped for Life Academy

The post Forensics and Abortion (w/ Secular Pro-Life’s Monica Snyder) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:16:24

Content warning: This whole episode is about sex. It’s probably not the episode to listen to around your kids.

Secular Pro-Life’s Monica Snyder returns to the Equipped for Life Podcast for another series of episodes, beginning with the topic, “It’s About Babies, Not Your Sex Life.” Stemming from real-life conversations, Monica and Josh identify many of the various factors that contribute to pro-choice perceptions or labeling of pro-life people as being “anti-sex” and then respond accordingly to each factor.

The Dynamic Duo also provides some fun commentary on the symbiotic relationship between Secular Pro-Life and Equal Rights Institute, and how the pro-life movement as a whole can benefit from similar relationships.

Finally, towards the end, Josh and Monica talk about how snark might be a good last-resort effort in a dialogue situation.

Secular Pro-Life: It’s about the babies, not your sex life: 5 examples

Relational Apologetics Tips: How to Cultivate Friendship Amidst Challenging Conversations

Josh Brahm’s speech on relational apologetics

Gallup’s Moral Acceptability poll

Episode 47: Should Pro-Lifers be Snarky? (with Dank Pro-Life Memes)

Episode 49: Defining the Word “Abortion” Will Change Your Dialogues (with Dank Pro-Life Memes)

Episode 100: Celebrating 100 Episodes! (with the Whole Staff!)

Memes to End Abortion (formerly “Dank Pro-Life Memes”)

Pro-choice groups we mentioned worth following:

Center for Reproductive Rights

ANSIRH: Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health

Jessica Velenti

Jen Hamilton

The post It’s About the Babies, Not Your Sex Life (w/ Monica Snyder) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:30:52

We brought the entire staff on for our 100th episode! The team planned the outline without Josh, and the result was a fun, retrospective celebration of the podcast.

Ellen’s first blog post:
“Is It Okay to Find Edge Cases Challenging?”

Ellen’s most recent blog post:
“What Should We Call Them?”

Joshua’s episode on the podcast:
Listener Mail: Can You Be a Professional Musician AND Pro-Life?

Rebecca’s talking head video:
How to Dialogue with Crazy Extremists: Three Lessons I Learned from Teaching Philosophy

Our first podcast with Rebecca co-hosting:
Genuine or Performed? Acting Skills in Honest Dialogue

Josh’s article the atheist responded to:
Why I Hope Gosnell Doesn’t Go to Hell

Ellen’s favorite episode:
Response to Pro-Choice Propaganda

Rebecca’s favorite episode:
The whole Equipped for Life Course

Joshua’s favorite episode :
Responding to “Back-Alley” Abortion Arguments

Emily’s favorite episodes:
An Analysis of HBO’s “Unpregnant” Film

Become an Effective Lobbyist Using These Practical Tips (with Ali Rak)

Josh’s favorite episodes:
Humor in Dialogue

A Comedian Shares Tips for Using Humor in Dialogue

Defining the Word “Abortion” Will Change Your Dialogues (with Dank Pro-Life Memes)

Why Do They Always Ask About Rape?

Tim Hull’s favorite episode:
Survey Review: How Pro-Life & Pro-Choice People Define Abortion

Equal Rights Institute Website

Equipped for Life Academy

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

The post Celebrating 100 Episodes (with the Whole Staff!) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:22:27

It’s October, and 40 Days for Life campaigns are in full swing! Josh, Emily, and Rebecca share and react to short video tips sent in from pro-life activists from around the country on how to effectively participate in your local 40 Days for Life campaign. (SPOILER ALERT: it’s not as hard as you think!)

40 Days for Life website

A Sidewalk Counselor’s Run-Ins with Police and an Overzealous Security Guard – Part 1

A Sidewalk Counselor’s Run-Ins with Police and an Overzealous Security Guard – Part 2

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

Anonymous Sidewalk Counselor Blog Article

Equal Rights Institute Website

Equipped for Life Academy

Equipped for Life Course

The post Practical Tips for 40 Days for Life Volunteers appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:06:31

LIGHTNING!!! (in slow motion). In this podcast, Josh Brahm and Monica Snyder from Secular Pro-Life sort through listener mail from SPL’s mailbag and give quick responses to several questions and requests.

Part 2 of 2 addresses eight main topics, to include the biological case for the unborn, how to combat viral misinformation, the concept of abortion as healthcare, why women advocate for abortion, the medical necessity of third trimester abortions, what to do if the pro-choice person jumps topics, if brain activity should define personhood, and counseling resources for nonreligious, post-abortive women.

Part 1, in case you missed it

ERI Blog: Is Abortion 14 Times Safer Than Childbirth?

ERI Podcast: The Pregnant 10-Year-Old: Thinking Well About This Tragic Story (with Robin Atkins)

ERI Quick Response: The Embryo isn’t Human:

Little Souls at Rest

SPL: Fixed That Meme For You

SPL: Guardian article “What a pregnancy actually looks like” erases embryos

The Guardian: What a pregnancy actually looks like before 10 weeks, in pictures

Support After Abortion

Equal Rights Institute Website

Equipped for Life Academy

Equipped for Life Course

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

The post Listener Mail: Lightning Round! Part 2 (w/ Monica Snyder) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:11:57

LIGHTNING!!! (in slow motion). In this podcast, Josh Brahm and Monica Snyder from Secular Pro-Life sort through listener mail from SPL’s mailbag and give quick responses to several questions and requests.

Part 1 of 2 covers seven main topics, namely, whether the “pro-life movement” should actually be called the “anti-abortion movement”, the availability of abortion pills, discrimination against children with disabilities, how to welcome secular members into a pro-life space, if we should boycott pro-choice media, trying to understand how a pro-choice person thinks, and whether pro-choice activists reject pro-choice moderates.

The Cut Article (advises women on abortion pills to say they are having a miscarriage)

Dallas Morning News: Choosing Thomas — Inside a family’s decision to let their son live, if only for a brief time

ERI Podcast: When They Bite the Bullet

Pro-Choice people complaining about abortion and ableism:
https://www.protectchoice.org/article.php?id=140
https://rewirenewsgroup.com/2014/10/17/pro-choice-movement-excludes-people-disabilities
https://www.salon.com/2013/04/28/all_the_ways_you_judge_my_son
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/lucky-to-be-alive-zika-co_b_9166762

SPL Blog: Pro-Choice vs. Pro-Life Vocabulary

SPL Blog: No, Abortion Pills Aren’t Safer Than Tylenol

Equal Rights Institute Website

Equipped for Life Academy

Equipped for Life Course

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

The post Listener Mail: Lightning Round! Part 1 (w/ Monica Snyder) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 59:13

We recorded another episode with Secular Pro-Life’s Monica Snyder, our favorite practically co-host, to discuss Secular Pro-Life’s recent survey on the differences between how both sides of the issue define abortion.

A critical part of clear communication is making sure you and your dialogue partner are using the key words in the same way. Pro-life and pro-choice people often mean VERY different things when they use the word “abortion,” but they don’t know that, and miscommunication ensues.

This episode will help you avoid that miscommunication. The ERI team offers several practical dialogue tips stemming from what we can learn from this survey.

Related Links:

Take SPL’s survey

SPL blog post: How pro-lifers and pro-choicers define abortion: results from SPL’s survey

Figure 1: Which scenarios are abortions?

Figures 4 and 5: Pro-choice and Pro-life perspectives

Figure 6: Is it an abortion if it doesn’t cause death?

Figure 7: Is a miscarriage an abortion?

Figure 8: Are there ethical abortions?

The journal article that originally gave Monica Snyder the idea for this project: “Technically an abortion”: Understanding perceptions and definitions of abortion in the United States

EFL Podcast: Defining the Word “Abortion” Will Change Your Dialogues (with Dank Pro-Life Memes)

Charles Camosy: Beyond the Abortion Wars: A Way Forward for a New Generation

Equal Rights Institute Website

Equipped for Life Academy

Equipped for Life Course

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

The post Survey Review: How Pro-Life & Pro-Choice People Define Abortion appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:13:13

Yes, abortion pills are harmful to women and unborn children. We’re pro-life. But when you take an honest look at the evidence, there is no evidence that abortion pills are poisoning our wastewater.

Content warning: If you have experienced pregnancy loss, this may not be the episode for you. There’s an inherent graphic nature to the kinds of claims we’re offering factual and philosophical arguments against. While we kept the conversation as tame as possible, we know this is a very difficult subject for people who have lost one or more children, so please take care and pay attention to your body if you choose to listen to this episode.

Secular Pro-Life’s Monica Snyder joins Josh, Emily, and Rebecca to discuss the relatively recent argument from certain pro-life organizations that abortion pills and/or embryonic remains are poisoning our wastewater. We consider and respond to the strongest arguments for this claim and address the real harm this can have on people who have experienced miscarriage.

Related Links:

Secular Pro-Life: Are abortion pills harming the environment?

Secular Pro-Life’s proposed miscarriage remains protocol

FDA letter calculating risk of mifepristone

The fish study

Equal Rights Institute Website

Equipped for Life Academy

Equipped for Life Course

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

The post No, Abortion Pills Aren’t Harming the Environment appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

The post Listener Mail: Can You Be a Professional Musician and Pro-life? appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:18:40

ERI’s Affiliate Groups have been busy working with their coaches on practical dialogue tips for talking about IVF, now that it’s in the news more often.

First, Emily and Rebecca present to Josh for the first time what our groups have been working on. Afterward, they had a more personal discussion comparing and contrasting their intuitions about IVF. It turned into a really cool discussion between two open-minded Protestants and one open-minded Catholic having an ego-free discussion about where their views seem to differ.

Related Links:

ERI Blog: Get Ready. IVF Confusion is Coming

ERI Affiliate Group Program

ERI Statement: Should Women Be Prosecuted for Illegal Abortions?

Equal Rights Institute Website

Equipped for Life Course

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

The post How to Have Better Conversations About IVF appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:29:48

The Equipped for Life Podcast is back! After a long hiatus due to the production of Equipped for Life Academy, we’ve begun recording new episodes. We also have some old episodes in the archives we’ll be publishing as well. We loved this episode as our first episode back though.

After introducing Rebecca Carlson and welcoming her to be a second co-host on the podcast, Josh and Emily discuss their common backgrounds in music and musical theater, and how that affects our dialogue.

This leads to a listener mail question on how Emily is able to come across as spontaneous as she does even when saying memorized responses.

This leads to a FASCINATING discussion on, in the situation that we’re talking to a pro-choice person, whether it’s inherently deceptive to add fake thinking pauses, among other things, that actors commonly do when performing.

ERI Blog: The Best Way to Expose Logical Fallacies: Don’t Call Them by Name

ERI Instagram: If Glinda and Elphaba were pro-life advocates

ERI Podcast Clip: Can a musical background improve your dialogues?

Dallas Morning News: Choosing Thomas — Inside a family’s decision to let their son live, if only for a brief time

The Place We Find Ourselves Podcast

Equal Rights Institute Website

Equipped for Life Academy

Equipped for Life Course

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

The post Genuine or Performed? Acting Skills in Honest Dialogue appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:33:06

Josh’s favorite Christian apologist, Dr. Randal Rauser, joins the show. Randal describes himself as “progressively Evangelical and generously Orthodox.” Josh asks him about open-mindedness, his observations about the pro-life movement, when it’s appropriate to call leaders out publicly, and the difference between an “agitation apologetics model” and an “agreement apologetics model.”

While Josh doesn’t agree with everything Rauser believes, that’s not the point, and this isn’t a debate episode. Josh found this to be a good opportunity to listen to the views of a very careful thinker in spite of the fact that they don’t agree on everything within the abortion debate.

Related Links:

Randal Rauser’s website

Randal’s YouTube channel

Randal interviews Josh about the state of the abortion debate

Randal debates Trent Horn on abortion

Randal’s book, “Jesus Loves Canaanites”

Equal Rights Institute Website

Equal Rights Institute Blog

Equipped for Life Course

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

The post Intellectual Honesty, Transparency, and the Pro-Life Movement (with Apologist Dr. Randal Rauser) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:33:06

Josh Brahm and Monica Snyder have an open conversation about biology, philosophy, and how they interact with persuasion in the abortion debate. Monica has a STEM background so she and Josh compare notes on how STEM professionals and philosophers feel about each other, and why many of them are arrogant.

They also discuss:

– How arrogance, confidence, and impostor syndrome often interact with each other;

– The pros and cons of using big words; – Whether biology vs. philosophy are more likely to change minds on abortion;

– “Should we prioritize our arguments more based on whether they are influential, emotionally compelling, logically sound, or other factors?”

– Steps anyone can take to become more rational.

Related Links:

Secular Pro-Life: https://SecularProLife.org

SPL posts about changing from PC to PL: https://secularprolife.com/becomingpr…

SPL’s “No. embryos aren’t parasites” video: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=546…

ERI’s article “Abortion Images: A Case for Disagreement without Division” http://bit.ly/2uJWRcI

Equal Rights Institute Website: https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equal Rights Institute Blog: https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equipped for Life Course: https://EquippedCourse.com

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass: http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com

The post The Psychology of Persuasion (with Secular Pro-Life’s Monica Snyder) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:26:24

Monica Snyder shares a very emotional story about going undercover in a late-term abortion facility in Washington DC while being 28-weeks pregnant. She talks about what was harder than she expected and the perspective she gained about the employees at the clinic. She also helps Josh understand some things he had never heard about some post-abortive women, and responds to the most frequently asked questions and challenges from both sides of the abortion debate regarding this video.

Editor’s note: As you may remember from a previous editor’s note, we had technical problems on this recording day that went undiagnosed until later because I didn’t think we needed to wear the headphones this time. I did the best I could to fix it, but it’s way below my standards. Thank you for your patience.

Transcript

Josh Brahm: Welcome back to the Equipped For Life podcast. We are back with my friend Monica Snyder from Secular Pro-Life. And again, if you haven’t heard the last couple of episodes, you should listen to those too. We talk about who she is and who Secular Pro-Life is and all the awesome things. But this is gonna be a very different episode than the last few. This is a very non-prepped episode because you have a really amazing story. I don’t know if amazing is the best adjective for it.

Monica Snyder: Unusual.

Josh Brahm: Unusual. Something that you, at least when you told me, I don’t think you’d been able to talk about it very much. Is that right?

Monica Snyder: Yeah, it’s still the case that I can talk about it now, but have not talked about it a lot still.

Josh Brahm: Yeah. So I found out after the fact and just… You should just share the story. I just want you to be able to – it was really obvious to me that there are really important things for people to hear about. I’ve got so many questions I want to ask you, but I think just get into the story. What happened and how did it begin?

Monica Snyder: Yes. So the short version, the conclusion we’ll get to eventually, is that I went undercover at a clinic. Not something I ever thought that I would do or had seriously considered. Basically, I was pregnant with my daughter. So right now as we record this, it is November of 2022. So I was pregnant with my daughter in the beginning of this year. I was, let’s see, I think, like, seven months pregnant in January. I was at a pro-life event with another activist who asked me, “Oh, how far along are you?” And I told her. And then later on she pulled me aside and she said, “Listen, I have a project maybe you could help me with.” My friend asked, “How far along are you?” I told her. And then she pulled me aside later and said, “I have a project I’d like to talk to you about; maybe you would be interested.” And she basically said, “We are looking for people who could go undercover at this clinic in Washington, DC,” because they wanted to find out some of the ins and outs of how the clinic was practicing.

There’s some suspicion that the clinic is not operating within the law, which is – to be clear, DC doesn’t have any gestational limits on abortion and you can still break the law anyway, depending on what kind of procedures you’re using, how you’re treating the patients, things like that. There are some suspicions that sometimes they have children born alive and then they don’t provide the kind of care they’re supposed to, but there’s not proof. And they were looking to get a closer look at this clinic. And I will tell you, when she first asked me, I didn’t think that I was going to do that, because – I can’t even tell you why. It sounded intimidating. I didn’t even really give it a lot of thought –

Josh Brahm: Totally intimidating.

Monica Snyder: – I was sort of just like, “Probably I’m not going to do that.” No. But, and I’ve mentioned it before and I’ll probably mention it again, my brother is a major source of inspiration to me, a pro-life atheist, extremely rational, extremely smart guy. And he was with me when that conversation happened and later on it was just us. He’s like, “Do you think you’re going to do it?” I was like, “I don’t know. I don’t think so.” And he’s like, “Well, why not?” And I was like, “I think I’m just afraid.” And he was like, “Well, of what, though?” Because the thing is, it’s not illegal. It is not illegal to go undercover and record things. Now, it depends on where you live –

Josh Brahm: Really?

Monica Snyder: – If you are ever thinking about doing anything like this, and I’m not saying that you should, first thing you need to do is figure out if you live in an area where it is two-party consent or not. So in a place with one-party consent, that means that you can record a conversation as long as one person involved in it consents. If you are one of the people involved in it, then you can. There are places where it’s two-party consent, and if you record a conversation there, you could get in big trouble. Just be careful. Okay? Know what you’re doing.

Josh Brahm: Okay, so maybe now I’m going to ask my first ignorant question of the day. So I understand about one or two-party state recording things, but in my head, where I went to when you said it’s not illegal – I am instantly going to trespassing laws and things like that. Are you saying that it’s not illegal for a pro-lifer to go into the clinic under false pretenses? Or…help me understand exactly what you mean.

Monica Snyder: It’s not trespassing. I call them, I make an appointment, I bring them the money, I give them the money. If I decide to change my mind later, people can do that. People are certainly allowed to change their mind after they get there. The worst thing that could happen logistically is they could realize that I’m recording, get mad and tell me to get out and it would be really awkward. And I don’t care about that. So when he and I were talking about that and I realized – I’m afraid because it’s a weird situation, I hate pretending things, I’m very blunt. I don’t know how to do it. But really, if the worst thing that can happen is they say, “Get out,” then okay. And I was in a very unique position because you need someone who’s willing to do something like that, and they have to –  and I want to make this clear because it’s come to our attention since then that not everyone understands this – You have to actually be pregnant to do this. You cannot put on a fake belly or something because when you go in, they do an ultrasound. You have to actually be pregnant.

So imagine for a moment: when they’re trying to figure out people who could help them with this kind of project, how many people are willing to do this kind of thing? How many people care enough about this issue to do it? And then they are pregnant in the right time frame, in the right logistics, and all these things.

Josh Brahm: I mean, I’ve heard pro-lifers say – and this feels maybe sometimes a little bit overly, maybe, conspiratorial or something like that – I know I’ve heard pro-lifers when talking about that kind of thing be like, “I would never go into an abortion clinic if I was pregnant.” As if they’re going to get held down or something like that. I’m like, “I don’t think so.”

Monica Snyder: Oh, I’ve had people say that to me like, “Oh, I’m so glad nothing bad happened.” No, it’s not – I have a lot of things to say about this and obviously I strongly disagree with what this clinic is doing, but the reality is, at least as far as I can tell, that certainly the nurses that I talked to – and I believe this is probably the case for a lot of people who work in abortion clinics – they’re not there to hold you down and give you an abortion. They are there because they believe that they are helping you. And I’m sure there are many women that also believe they are helped by it.

Josh Brahm: Yeah, absolutely. I think, as far as I can tell, the most-likely-to-be-true stories are of places where it wasn’t so much the nurses, but maybe an abortion doctor who basically, once the person was on the bed –

Monica Snyder: Right, like, “We’re not backing out now.”

Josh Brahm: – and they’re kind of starting the procedure, and she starts saying, “I don’t want this,” and he’s like, “No, we’re not stopping.” –

Monica Snyder: “We’re already here.”

Josh Brahm: – which is really bad.

Monica Snyder: No, it is, it is. But no, I wasn’t worried about that at all. Nobody is going to strap me down.

Josh Brahm: “So we’re going to take you from the exam room, the counseling room…”

Monica Snyder: And also, as a background thing, too, I’m super confrontational. So it’s like –

Josh Brahm: Yes, you are.

Monica Snyder: That was not something I was concerned about. And this clinic that I went to – and I can tell you more about it in a minute – it’s staffed by, as far as I can tell, literally three people: two nurses and a doctor.

Josh Brahm: No one doing admin or anything?

Monica Snyder: No, I mean, one of the nurses does the admin stuff. It’s not a large clinic. It’s not a large clinic. It’s not that many people, and there’s a lot of other people around. There’s people in the waiting room. Like, realistically, how is that going to work? And that was not something I was concerned about. So I’m talking to my brother and he’s like, “Well, what’s the worst thing that can happen?” And I’m like, “Well, I guess it’d be embarrassing.” And he’s like, “That doesn’t seem that bad.” I’m like, “Well, you’re not the one doing it.” But I care a lot about this issue. I realized that I was in a unique position to help with this.

Another important background information: so, Secular Pro Life has done a lot of work trying to help people realize that there are multiple places in the country where you can get an abortion at any stage in pregnancy for any reason. Not a ton of places. Most places you can’t, but there’s, like, at least seven or eight places where you can. And to be super clear, I am not saying that someone has a wanted pregnancy and at seven or eight months you’re like, “Mm, nah.” That is not what I’m saying. When I bring this up, people are like, “Oh, you think they do it just for funsies?” They literally say the phrase “just for funsies.”

Josh Brahm: Really?

Monica Snyder: That’s like, I’ve heard that, like, eight times, “just for funsies.” No, I don’t think they’re getting a seven month abortion just for funsies, no. But in your mind, are the options “just for funsies” or “you’re going to die”? Are those the two options? Because that’s not what’s happening.

So, important background before I continue: all of the research and the – there’s a little bit of quantitative research, most of it is not quantitative, it’s qualitative – but there’s a lot of evidence to show that women seek later abortions, including post viability abortions, because yes, it could be for a terrible fetal anomaly, or a fetal anomaly that’s not life threatening but that they’re really freaked out about. And it could be for a health reason. I’m not saying those don’t happen. I’m not even saying those are uncommon. But, it’s also often because they wanted an earlier abortion and they weren’t able to get the resources together in time. It could be money, time, transportation, all sorts of things. It could be because they struggled to decide whether they wanted to get an abortion. It wasn’t like, “Mm, no, I’ll do an abortion now.” It was more like, “I don’t know, I don’t know, I don’t know.” And by the time they make the decision, they’re further along. And also –

Josh Brahm: Like denial that can happen for a long time.

Monica Snyder: Yes. It could be a change in circumstances that is not medical, something to do with finances or with the relationship. It’s not even that hard to imagine. And also it could be because they did not know they were pregnant.

Josh Brahm: Right, that’s what I was going to say.

Monica Snyder: And people think that’s crazy. It’s not crazy. And people think that when it happens, it’s like one of those reality TV shows. It’s not that crazy. When people are using certain kinds of contraception, when people have certain kinds of other issues that block or mimic symptoms of pregnancy, also do not underestimate the psychological power of denial. You may genuinely not realize you’re pregnant. And for anyone who doesn’t believe me, check out – it was a recently published study called “Is Third Trimester Abortion Exceptional?” by Katrina Kimport. And she profiles women who get abortions after 24 weeks. And some of them, it is because of a fetal anomaly. And some of them it is because they didn’t have resources earlier. And some of them it is because they didn’t know they were pregnant. A woman found out she was pregnant at 26 weeks and then she got an abortion.

Josh Brahm: And I’m assuming she’s not coming from the pro-life side.

Monica Snyder: No, no. Katrina Kimport is a major abortion rights advocate. And she says at least twice, maybe three times in the paper – it’s open access, anybody can read it – that we need to understand these situations, because even if we had perfect access to abortion earlier, we cannot have gestational limits because at minimum, there will always be some women who don’t find out they’re pregnant until after 24 weeks. So you don’t have to take my word for it. You can read that paper as an example. And we have other research too: secularprolife.org/laterabortion, all one word. Lots of resources there.

So all that to say, at Secular Pro-Life, we’ve done a lot of work on this issue trying to help people understand that 21-plus-week abortion, post viability abortion, even third trimester abortion – I’m not saying it’s as common as first trimester. It’s not. You’re like, “Oh, it’s only 1%.” Yeah, 1% of what number? It’s thousands of times a year. And it is not all for medical emergencies. In fact, it’s not clear that even most of them are for medical emergencies. And we have found, as we discussed this, a couple of things. First of all, moderate people, this matters to them. They don’t like this. They might not agree with us that abortion should be outlawed from conception on, but they do think that this is a problem that’s going too far. And secondly, a lot of other people, they refuse to believe us. It does not matter what I show them. I can show them websites saying that they do this. I can show them interviews of abortion providers saying that they do this. I can show them examples of women in the press saying that they have done this. And they just, they won’t believe it. And in a way, it frustrates me, but at the same time, I think it speaks to some common ground here where we – I think we both recognize, the person I’m talking to and myself, that this is very upsetting and problematic. And their emotional reaction to that is to choose to believe it is not happening. I don’t really blame them. I also wish it wasn’t happening.

All that to say, when I was presented with this opportunity, there was a part of me that felt like this was another way to try to help people understand that this is something you can do. And also, it is not just that it is legal. It’s that a lot of moderate pro-choice people have unjustified faith in abortion providers and abortion clinics and the procedures and practices they have in place. So they assume, without, I think, much evidence, that women are screened for mental health issues, coercion, other problems to make sure they’re assumed they’re given fully informed consent. They assume that everything is done in the way you would vaguely expect for any other medical procedure to make sure it’s all on the up and up and that women go into this with full knowledge, no coercion, making this decision for their own very, very good reasons, probably dire medical reasons.

And so for these combination [sic] of reasons – wanting to help out other activists who I feel very connected to; realizing I’m in a unique position; realizing this might help other people understand that this is happening… And to be clear also, I do care and am horrified by the idea of a viable child being destroyed. But also, I believe that women seeking abortion this late for non-medical reasons, there’s other things going on there that in some cases might be extremely serious that we should be understanding better and we aren’t even talking about it. We’re pretending it literally doesn’t even exist.

Josh Brahm: So talk a little bit more about that.

Monica Snyder: So I think they’re more likely to be panicking if they were carrying a wanted pregnancy of a healthy fetus and then they change their mind. I don’t think it’s for funsies. I think it’s because something is happening that they need support. I think they’re more likely to be traumatized if they do it. I think it should be obvious as to why. I think that we should always, with all abortions, ideally – if it’s going to be legal in the first place – make sure that women are doing it because they feel like it is a choice, not because they feel like they have no choice. And if they feel like they have no choice, why is that? And what can we do to make sure this is a fully freely made choice? Right?

But that gets more dire the further it goes along. And I feel like, if the reasons aren’t obvious, it’s because it’s much harder to deny the existence of the other here. Look, I have been pregnant multiple times. In the early parts of the first trimester, you can’t feel anything except maybe nausea. Right? But we’re talking about getting to a point where you’re feeling kicking, and I’m not telling anyone else how to feel about that. I have always thought that the kicking and the movements of my babies when I’m pregnant is a profound experience.

So, I agreed to do it. I was very nervous. There were certain things they wanted me to try to bring up in conversation. That’s very weird because you’re not just letting the conversation flow organically and you don’t want to draw suspicion to yourself and you don’t, you know, it’s a tricky thing. It’s all a form of dishonesty. Like, you’re pretending to be there for reasons you know you’re not.

Josh Brahm: You’re like a spy or something.

Monica Snyder: It’s uncomfortable. It’s cognitive dissonance. And I was worried that when I went in, I wouldn’t be able to hide how angry I was. I thought I would get there and be outraged at the fact that they’re doing this, you know, because I do think it is deeply immoral. I don’t think that I am a good liar. I’ve had a lot of people tell me that it’s not subtle when I’m angry, right? I’ve never been a spy, you know? And so I was worried – and I talked to the people who approached me about this – I was worried that I would get there and my irritation at least would be obvious and that would be a problem. And they suggested that probably a lot of women who go through here aren’t going to be chipper. Maybe it’s not that weird, kind of thing, whatever.

But to my surprise – and I was very surprised about this – So, another background: I’ve been in the abortion debate, you know, 15 years or something. I’ve seen people say all sorts of things. I’ve had all sorts of arguments between people that have really horrible things and try to make you mad and all these things, right? I feel like I’ve heard everything. I think I have pretty thick skin, but this is all online. It’s all just discussion. It’s, you know, it’s not in person. It’s not the same. But I didn’t think there’d be much that would surprise me. I’ve also studied late term abortion very, very extensively, like I just said.

Josh Brahm: Yeah, you’re like the expert.

Monica Snyder: If there is one, I mean, I don’t know. But I expected to go in and, you know, kind of know what they’re going to say and what I’m going to expect. And that would help too. So I expected to go in prepared, maybe a little nervous, maybe really irritated or angry. That’s kind of how I thought it was going to go. It was nothing like that. It was nothing like that. So backing up a little bit, I called multiple clinics in DC. They were not actually specific as to which specific clinic it had to be. There’s at least three clinics in DC that will perform abortions very, very late. One of them couldn’t get me in until past the time I would be there. And just a side note, if they had gotten me in, I would have been almost 30 weeks.

Josh Brahm: 30 weeks?

Monica Snyder: And they knew that. Yes. And I was like, “Well, I won’t still be in town by that time.” So we didn’t do it. Another one did not do it past 26 weeks without a more specific reason, or maybe it was 27, but I was going to be 28 weeks. And so the one that ended up –

Josh Brahm: Just for clarity, are we talking LMP or post-fertilization?

Monica Snyder: LMP. Yeah. So I called the Washington Surgi-Clinic. It was really bizarre. The woman who picked up was very cheerful. Not just, like, professional, but like, cheerful. And she asked me for my LMP, she asked me a couple other basic questions. She explained that it would be $11,400 for the abortion and that it would take three days, two days of dilation and one day of extraction. She said that I would need baggy clothes to be comfortable. She said that I had to have someone else to drive me the third day because of the medications I would be taking. And she said that they would accept cashier’s check or cash. I can’t remember if credit card, it doesn’t matter.

And so I told her all that information and she confirmed for me that the day of my appointment, I would be, I think 28 weeks and one day. I was like, “Okay.” She said nothing about it other than that. And she said, “We’ll see you there.” And she didn’t ask me anything else. She didn’t ask me why I needed it. But maybe you don’t screen over the phone, right? Maybe that’s an in-person conversation.

So I go to DC, I go to the clinic, and it’s kind of busy. It’s a small clinic. It’s not huge at all. But there were several people in the waiting room, I was a little surprised. And several of them, like me, showing – I was visibly showing by then, I can feel my daughter Ruby kicking all the time.

And so I get there, there’s other people there. Some of them seem fine; I’m not going to pretend everybody was, like, devastated. But some of them did not. There were people crying. There was someone who felt ill because of the medications that they had to take. And she called whoever her man is, boyfriend or husband or whoever, asking if he would come wait with her so she could just like – there’s no windows in the waiting room just because of where it is. It’s kind of, it’s a little stuffy, it’s whatever – she asked if he would come with his car so she could just lay down in his car, and he wouldn’t. I don’t know why, but it was very depressing to listen to.

And I started to realize what I had not anticipated – there’s several things I didn’t anticipate – but one of the things I didn’t anticipate was, there’s these women here who are about to do this for real, and I think some of them don’t want to. Like, some of them seem like they don’t want to. I don’t want any of them to, obviously. But from their perspective, some of them seem okay and some of them really don’t seem okay. And what I wanted to do was go sit next to them and say, “Are you okay? Why are you here? What do you need? How can I help you get out of here?”  And I recognized that some of them would have been like, “I don’t want to get out of here, I want to do this,” I’m not saying they all wanted to get out of there. But I don’t think all of them did. And I would have liked to at least check.

So what I didn’t anticipate was, I was starting to feel like I’m not doing the right thing here, because I’m ignoring them, and they are about to do something that, for some of them, maybe it’ll be fine. And for some of them, it’s probably going to change their whole life in a really horrific way. And I’m here right now, you know. And I’m ignoring them, in the hope that this video I take will have some sort of bigger impact in the longer term, which is a super uncertain hope. I don’t even know what I’m going to get on video. And realistically, a lot of people are just going to ignore it or they’ll say it was heavily edited. I knew that way before we started. Everybody knows that. Right?

Josh Brahm: We’ve seen the David Daleiden response.

Monica Snyder: Yeah. People can release full footage of things and they’ll just be like, “No, heavily edited. And also you’re a liar.” And to be fair, kind of am. I snuck in here. I get what you’re saying. I don’t know how else to do this. So the first thing I didn’t anticipate was the feeling of deep uncertainty that this is the right move. I actually thought maybe what I’m doing is immoral, not in the sense that I’m being deceptive, but in the sense that my priorities are really out of whack here.

Josh Brahm: You can totally understand how this conflict that you must have been experiencing –

Monica Snyder: Yeah. And I had to be there for like three hours. So it’s like, yeah. That was the first thing, where I was like, I heard that woman’s phone call, I see this other woman crying, not all of them but some of them are showing. And maybe they’re all there for a fatal fetal anomaly. Unlikely. Just given the setup of the clinic, given the setup of DC laws and what we’ve known about it before. So that was hard.

Josh Brahm: So if I could jump in real quick on that, just in case it’s helpful – and I really, generally speaking, try to avoid any kind of analogies to war because this is different than war. And those analogies break down real fast. – But I know there are stories in World War II where there’d be some kind of small band of soldiers, some small unit –

Monica Snyder: Some band of brothers.

Josh Brahm: I know, this is so hard for me not to say “band of brothers” – who are sent in behind enemy lines, and are meant to try to get to Berlin or wherever –

Monica Snyder: How many people do they have to walk over to do that?

Josh Brahm: – And it’s like, okay: then they see this SS soldier somewhere and it’s like, “Hey, we could easily kill him and maybe all these good things would happen as a result. But then we’re more likely to fail the mission,” and they’d have to just pass by all these different horrible things. And that’s an understandable thing in crazy situations like this.

Monica Snyder: And you know, I have to say, like, I have never done sidewalk counseling. I’ve certainly never done the rescue movement type stuff, none of that. But it gave me a lot of empathy for the people who are motivated by those things. Because whatever we’re talking about with, “Where is the pro-life movement going?” and, “How should we handle legislation?” and “How should we think about slowly over years converting our coworkers?”, meanwhile, there’s a woman sitting there right now. What are we going to do about it? Nothing, apparently nothing. That’s a hard thing. So I didn’t anticipate that. That was difficult.

The other thing I didn’t anticipate is that…Okay, did you ever read the Lisa Harris paper where she talks about performing a second-trimester abortion while she’s pregnant in her second trimester?

Josh Brahm: No.

Monica Snyder: It’s very moving, but essentially there’s a part where – and she’s pro-choice. She did not convert to our side. I’m not trying to misrepresent her – but she talks about how basically she is performing a second-trimester abortion and at the very moment that she pulls a foot out of this woman’s uterus, her baby kicks.

Josh Brahm: Oh my gosh.

Monica Snyder: And when that happened – I’m going to get it not exactly right, I’m paraphrasing – but she basically said that it was as if some kind of impulse went straight from her fingers right past all of her pro-choice training, right past all of her feminist beliefs, straight into her core, and she just started weeping. Okay? And she’s still pro-choice. She advocates for abortion, but in that paper, I think she was trying to lean into the conflict here that often gets overlooked.

Josh Brahm: Yeah. And she’s not the first one.

Monica Snyder: No.

Josh Brahm: I mean, there’s an abortion practitioner. I’ll never forget. He had this quote about when he was doing some kind of a dismemberment abortion, he described feeling the sensation –

Monica Snyder: Like electricity.

Josh Brahm: Like an electric current. There’s, like, people describing it –

Monica Snyder: They are dealing with this in their face in real life. And then on Twitter, people are like, “Oh, you’re just ending the process happening in your body.” And the providers are like, “Nah.”

Josh Brahm: They’re like, “No, it’s more involved than that.”

Monica Snyder: But the reason I bring up Lisa Harris is because it made me think of that, in sort of a way where it’s like, obviously I’m not about to actually get an abortion. And I know that. I am going to record some stuff, and then I’m going to walk out of here. Right? But what I didn’t anticipate is, knowing that did not stop me from feeling like Ruby was in danger. And that’s not rational. She’s not in danger. I’m not about to get an abortion. Nobody’s going to hold me down. I’m taller than both of the nurses there. And I wasn’t worried about it anyway. But I did not anticipate how much I would feel like I’m almost betraying Ruby by being here, and I feel like she’s in danger, but she’s not in danger. But I feel like she’s in danger. I got to get out of here, but she’s not in danger. “That’s dumb. Just keep it together.” And so I was feeling anxious about that.

And then I was telling myself, you know, “You’re going to leave in whatever, one hour, two hours, whatever it is, and Ruby is fine, and you are fine.” And then I realized that that doesn’t help everybody else sitting here. They’re not fine and they’re not going to be fine. Or at least at minimum, their fetuses are not going to be fine. I don’t think all of them are going to be fine either. So bringing it back to the first problem. And then the other thing that I didn’t anticipate is, even though I knew that I’m not going to get an abortion, I’m going to leave, it is still very difficult emotionally to think about all this in terms of my child.

So, I am getting my blood drawn, I’m getting my vitals taken, I’m getting an ultrasound, and I’m having these conversations with the staff there. And one of the things I asked them was if…if Ruby would feel pain. Ruby’s not going to feel pain, we’re leaving. But it was hard to even think about because, in real life, right here, right now, I’m in the building where they don’t know who I am. And if I went crazy at this very moment and changed my mind, I could literally start the procedure right now. There is nothing wrong with Ruby. She’s completely healthy. I’m completely healthy. And if I wanted to, it is legal and they will do it. They will literally…pull her apart. And it’s weird because I know that. I’m literally a pro-life activist and I try to convince other people this is true all the time.

Josh Brahm: Right.

Monica Snyder: I’m the one telling other people that this is true. But then I’m sitting in the building and I’m like, “I can’t believe this is true. I can’t believe that this is a real thing that really happens. And even more amazingly, nobody believes me.” And I’m sitting right here, you know? And so I could not ask them that question – I asked more than one person that question – without crying. I could not. And it’s funny because – “funny” is not the right word – but when the footage was released, there are some people who are like, “Oh, she’s such a good actress.” I’m not acting! I’m not acting. I was completely distraught, you know? I’m not that good of an actress.

And so talking about that, it’s interesting too, because before I agreed to do it, there was some discussion of “What will your backstory be? What will be your explanation for why you need a 28 week abortion?” The thing is, you don’t need an explanation. They didn’t ever ask. They don’t care – I shouldn’t say they don’t care. Most generous interpretation? I think they believe it’s not their business, and they don’t want to distress women who are already making a difficult decision, so they don’t pry. I think that’s how some of them see it. I also think some of them don’t care.

But either way, nobody asked me why I was doing this at any point. Never did they ask “why are you doing it?” Nobody asked me, “Why are you doing it?” Nobody asked me, “Have you already considered adoption or parenting?” “Do you need resources about those things?” That never came up. Informed consent in this context meant reading and signing paperwork about the possible risks of the procedure and the medications. That’s it. There is no counseling required. They didn’t tell me anything about it.

Josh Brahm: This is not what most pro-choice people think happens.

Monica Snyder: No. It might not be this way at every single abortion clinic. I’m sure it depends on the state, I’m sure it depends on the clinic. I’m just saying, I’m at a clinic that’s about to perform a 28 week abortion. And for those who don’t know, generally speaking, viability is around 24 weeks. If I gave birth to this child right now, she would have a very good chance of survival. And there’s no discussion of “How are you feeling about this? Is this really what you want? Have you considered these other options? Do you need resources for these other options?” That didn’t happen at all. There’s no screening for mental health issues.

And, now, this might not be the case for everyone everywhere, but this is my fourth child that I’ve birthed. For the previous ones, every prenatal exam I had, as a standard procedure, they screened for depression and other issues. Not specific to me. Because I showed any – I was fine. But for everybody, they’re like, “Have you answered this body of questions?” –

Josh Brahm: The standard.

Monica Snyder: – Yeah, just make – “How are – are you doing okay?” you know, kind of thing as a standard thing. And here they didn’t do that. Now, there’s a lot of debate about whether abortion causes mental health issues or not. The other side says it doesn’t and we’re just making it up, and we say we think it probably does. But to be super clear, they might say, “Oh, it doesn’t cause mental health issues,” and studies that showed mental health issues were for women who already had problems, right? Let’s just assume that is the whole story. That still means you have a reason to screen women to see if they already have those mental health issues.

Josh Brahm: Yeah.

Monica Snyder: Because abortion is known to exacerbate them. Which shouldn’t be a surprise to anybody. And there was no mental health screening at all. And I am in this clinic, you know, two to three hours crying on and off. Not everyone there was crying. Some people were, but I was crying on and off when I was talking to them. I’m obviously not…doing this for funsies –

Josh Brahm: – doing great.

Monica Snyder: Yeah, exactly. And they weren’t unkind. The one nurse was like, “If you need to talk about things with us, it’s okay. We’re here to listen,” you know, “You’re okay. It’s okay.” Like, and I didn’t feel like she was doing that to push me towards anything. I felt like she was being reassuring. But she also wasn’t like, “Are you okay?”, you know.

I have family and friends in the medical field, nurses, doctors, whatever, and generally when I’ve talked to them about this, they’ve been like, “That’s nuts, because when we do other kinds of procedures, even much less controversial procedures than abortion – it could be like a knee replacement – but if someone is crying on an off as you’re getting ready to do it, you’re gonna be like, ‘Everybody stop everything.’ ” Right? “What are you doing? Like, what is happening right now? Are you consenting to this?”

Josh Brahm: Right. So I wonder what you think about this. I’m trying to put myself in their shoes. So you just described a couple of different ways that they might be thinking about abortion and mental health and why they should be screening. So I’m trying to come up with, like, “What is my most charitable option?”

Monica Snyder: Sure. “What’s the most generous interpretation?”

Josh Brahm: I’m not sure if it’s plausible. So I wonder what you think. Because I know –

Monica Snyder: Well, most generous and most plausible are different things.

Josh Brahm: I agree. Well, sometimes at least. But, so the way that I think about this is, I don’t want to have such a charitable view where it’s implausible and it’s dumb. I want, like, “What is a plausible charitable view?” And I kind of go with that until I’m given a reason to have it go worse.

Monica Snyder: Okay. I know that I’m just speculating too. I didn’t ask them, you know.

Josh Brahm: Right. So while we speculate here together –

Monica Snyder: We’ll speculate together.

Josh Brahm: – there are some pro-choice people that believe that the whole post-abortion syndrome thing is, it’s not that it’s caused by the abortion, and it’s not that it’s caused… you know, it’s [not], like, this thing that happens because they already had something going on. They think – I think they think that the women are fine before, they’re fine that day, they’re fine for a while after. And if they end up having guilt or depression or worse, it’s because of us. It’s our fault.

Monica Snyder: Right, right, right.

Josh Brahm: We’ve kept it so stigmatized that now we have basically caused them this harm –

Monica Snyder: Right, if they have any issues, it’s because we made them feel guilty by stigmatizing abortion –

Josh Brahm: – ‘cause it’s, like, unjustified guilt. So do you think maybe that might be in their head, and then that would be why they wouldn’t be screening?

Monica Snyder: Who’s “they” in this?

Josh Brahm: The people that you’re going to – the employees –

Monica Snyder: No, no. What you just described, I think most of the time, is a common thought of pro-choice activists.

Josh Brahm: Yeah.

Monica Snyder: And I think…in fairness to them, I think we do stigmatize abortion –

J; Yes.

Monica Snyder: – and it does affect how people perceive it. We sort of – that’s kind of part of our thing. You know?

Josh Brahm: Right.

Monica Snyder: So that’s not untrue. But I think that the people who work in clinics – and I’m saying this based on the way that people treated me there, but also based on reading Lisa Harris, reading Warren Hearn, reading some of these providers who’ve done this, especially later term, reading Danger Talk and –

Josh Brahm: They talk a lot about that on the –

Monica Snyder: They talk a lot about – they’re much more blunt and realistic about what abortion is doing – and by that I mean killing a human – and about how deeply emotionally fraught it can be for the women seeking it. In fact, in some ways pro-choice people are trying to talk out of both sides of their mouths because they’re trying to say, “This is a really deeply serious, very difficult decision, but also if it’s difficult, it’s because of you.” We all, I think, understand that there is some element of the discourse that’s stigmatizing that is true. Whether we’re correct to stigmatize it or not is a different discussion. But that’s true.

Josh Brahm: Right.

Monica Snyder: But also, like they say, most women aren’t just like, “I will just go get an abortion.” Why is that? Okay? Anyone who’s had a wanted pregnancy, or an unintended pregnancy that ended up being a source of joy, or an unintended pregnancy that was difficult but then they birthed a kid and they loved them, or all sorts of other circumstances – look, forget the abortion debate. Anybody who has experienced having children understands this is an emotionally fraught issue. That shouldn’t be confusing.

And so if someone is seeking an abortion at any stage – but I would argue, the later it is, the more likely you should be just like, even if you’re pro-choice, “What’s going on? Is this what you want?” Because the further you go, the more fraught it is. And I think the people that are staffing the clinic don’t check. I think there’s a couple different reasons you could say that people don’t check. I think a lot of it is, not wanting to be stigmatizing, not wanting to be getting in your business. You’ve probably already, from their perspective, gone through a lot of people judging you and questioning you, and they’re just here to, you know, “You know what you need for your life.”

Josh Brahm: “You’ve already figured it out. You’ve already thought about it.”

Monica Snyder: Yeah. “We’re just here to help you make this decision you’ve already made and – not make it, but, you know, facilitate it. And you’re not going to get that judgment from us.” Right? I do also believe, yes, I do also believe that there are some people involved in clinics that…I do believe there are some people that…it makes a lot of money. You know? I think that’s true too. I think it’s as one-to-one as what our side says sometimes. I think there are a lot of true believers.

Josh Brahm: There are some abortion doctors.

Monica Snyder: There are a lot of true believers in abortion clinics and there are some that are making a lot of money. And maybe that’s kind of like…it happens to be both, you know? But in any case, they did not ask me anything about mental health issues, even though I’m crying on and off at a 28-week abortion for no medical reason. And I brought up – if you watch the footage, I brought up a couple of times – you know, I feel stupid being here. I feel stupid that I took this long to get here. I think I’m further along than anyone else here. You know, I should have made a decision sooner. It’s not like there’s anything really wrong with her. It’s just, and I would just say something to the effect of like, “It’s just, it’s not…I thought I could make it work. It’s not going to work. Right?

So, they never asked me anything about her fetal health history because why would they? It’s not necessary to this. It’s not required legally. It’s probably just going to be upsetting, whatever. So, but then I made sure, in case they thought that it was none of their business, I made sure to say there’s nothing wrong with her. Right? Just to make sure we’re all clear. But it doesn’t matter. It’s legal. And I said I wanted it.

And so, and they would reassure me, you know, “People come along as far as you.” One of them said, “You know, it’s not all the time, but we have it happen regularly.” One of them said, “Oh, sure, all the time.” But it could have just been that she was just trying to be reassuring, you know, whatever. You can’t quantify it. But at no point, even when I first called, nobody was like, “28 weeks?” They’re like, “Okay.” You know.

The other thing I noticed that I thought was concerning – so again, in contrast with my prenatal visits, when I would go to my prenatal visits, the occasions when my husband was off working and couldn’t go with me, he was not allowed to come back with me until they brought me back by myself first, made sure everything is safe at home – again, not because of me personally: standard procedure, every single time – and then they let him come back.

Josh Brahm: I’ve had the same experience.

Monica Snyder: Yeah, I think it’s quite common. I think it’s a good idea.

Josh Brahm: Yes, absolutely.

Monica Snyder: But now I’m at this clinic at 28 weeks and nobody asked me if I’m safe at home. Nobody asked me if I’m feeling any pressure from anyone. Nobody asked me anything. And it’s the same conversation we just had. Maybe they feel like it’s none of their business, but the odds of someone getting a 28 week non-medical abortion because they’re feeling coerced… I could be wrong; it seems to me that would be higher than twelve weeks or eight weeks or whatever, you know, maybe not. But it seems like –

Josh Brahm: I’ve been trying to – I’ve literally been doing that math in my head and – because it’s like, on one hand, it seems like the coercion would likely to be happen[ing] earlier, assuming that she told him about the pregnancy soon.

Monica Snyder: Assuming that she told them, yes.

Josh Brahm: And she might not have. So if she was in denial or she didn’t figure out she was pregnant for a while or whatever, and then she told him…and if she then ends up in an abortion clinic later, that does feel plausible to me that it is more likely than in first-trimester –

Monica Snyder: Yeah, there could be a theory for that.

Josh Brahm: – that he was the one pushing her, because he’s not been feeling the baby kick. He’s not having the same phenomenological experiences that she is. So obviously I don’t know. I’ve never seen a study on it.

Monica Snyder: Sure. There probably isn’t a study on it.

Josh Brahm: You and I are on the same page on, like, what seems most plausible. And I think we understand pro-choice people and what they’re going through fairly well.

Monica Snyder: They might not agree, but…So either way, there was no discussion of “How does your partner feel about this? How does your family feel about this? What’s up? Are you doing this of your own volition? Do you feel safe at home? Do you feel like, if you had this baby, you’d be safe at home?” All of those things.

Josh Brahm: Nothing.

Monica Snyder: And see, there should be common ground here because there’s research to show that women are at increased risk of domestic violence when they’re pregnant, when they have a new baby – which we should all agree is really f’ed up and not okay.

Josh Brahm: Yep.

Monica Snyder: But I feel like sometimes some pro-choice people…they see that research, they see, “See, so you better let her get an abortion.” And okay, let’s say we didn’t care about the morality of abortion. Is that the only answer? I feel like you’re saying, “If she’s more likely to be in danger and so she’s getting an abortion because she’s scared, the main thing is make sure she can get that abortion.” Shouldn’t the main thing be, “Why is she scared? What if she wants to keep this baby and she decides to get an abortion because she’s in danger?” That’s not pro-choice.

Josh Brahm: So I wonder if what’s happening there sometimes is that – and this is where their bias comes in even if it’s subconscious for them – where they do often, I think, look at these women. I mean, the employees. And there is sometimes this sort of – sometimes it’s a feminism thing, sometimes it’s not – but like a, “You could have a better life if you don’t have kids until later.”

Monica Snyder: Oh, no, I absolutely think that’s true.

Josh Brahm: If you are in here and even thinking about not having this kid, then clearly you shouldn’t have this kid. That should be five or ten years in your future.

Monica Snyder: Or if you are in an abusive relationship, “Don’t have this kid get out of the relationship, have a different kid later in a better situation” – no, I absolutely think that’s true. I absolutely think that’s a big part of the mentality. And that, I think, goes back to a lot of different things, but part of it is fetal personhood and all that stuff. There’s also – I’ve been noticing this more and more – if you read the “shout your abortion” page and stories and things – certainly not in all of them – but in a large portion of them, women talk about how they believe this soul can come back to them at a different time.

Josh Brahm: Wait, okay, this is new to me.

Monica Snyder: Really?

Josh Brahm: Tell me about that. Like, they’re believing a reincarnation kind-of-a-thing?

Monica Snyder: They are having some kind of – I don’t know if they would call it reincarnation, but they’re saying – they’re thinking toward their fetus, “I love you so much. I’m so sorry, but this is a very bad situation for these reasons. And so I trust you to come back to me when I’m in a better situation to have you.

Josh Brahm: “That’s my next pregnancy” kind-of-thing?

Josh Brahm: Yes, exactly. Bounce back kind-of-thing. It’s not uncommon. It’s not the majority of them, but I’ve been following the SYA page more in the last few months and at least of the ones I’ve scanned, it’s like a fourth of them.

Josh Brahm: Really?

Monica Snyder: I mean, that’s just, back-of-the-envelope calculation, take it for what it’s worth, but it’s definitely not, “Oh, I read this one time.” I keep seeing it. Where it’s like this idea of like, “Really sorry, love you. I’m not saying that casually; deeply felt. And please come back when I’m more ready.” Or “I will see you in heaven later.” Or that kind of thing.

And I think this is another thing providers understand that we don’t, and that the pro-choice activists don’t. Where it’s like, I just read an article that was published last year – I just read it, but it was published last year in the Boston Review. I think it was called “Why I Provide Abortions.” And there’s a lot of things in it that are really disturbing, but there was one part where she talks about a woman: she has her abortion. It’s later. It’s not third trimester, but it’s like, I think it was past first trimester. I can’t remember, I can’t remember. But she asks if she can keep the remains. And they’re like, “I’m sorry. Our clinic doesn’t really facilitate that.” And she’s like, “Okay.” And so they’re like, “Do you want to say goodbye?” And so she bows her head and says, “I love you. I’m so sorry.” And it’s that kind of thing where it’s like, it doesn’t seem like she wanted to do that. And I feel like that’s even more likely later on. And maybe I’m projecting too much because of how I feel about abortion, but she’s also crying and saying she’s sorry. So back to the clinic –

Josh Brahm: Well, can I just react to that real quick?

Monica Snyder: Yeah.

Josh Brahm: So obviously it makes sense to us why that would be a thing that she would say, right? Because even pro-choice women, a lot of times, this is not what they want to be doing. They feel like this is the least bad of all the options, even for the kid. I get all of that.

Monica Snyder: Yes. And really quick, just like how pro-choice women mourn their miscarriages, they could also mourn their abortions.

Josh Brahm: Yes. Yes.

Monica Snyder: It’s a mistake that both sides make to think that pro-choice women don’t mourn miscarriage or abortion. That is incorrect. Please continue.

Josh Brahm: So, going back just real quick – before we move on – to the, for lack of a maybe more accurate word for them, this kind of reincarnation kind of a view, I’ve spent a lot of time listening to people who are not religious and imagining myself in the shoes of a non-religious person, just like at an empathetic level and trying to be as understanding and everything. And I have really become [sic] to appreciate how much, like, I kind of like the idea of reincarnation in that view. There’s a kind of a, “How nice would it be if just every time we get to try again and take a little bit, like a subconscious level, what we learn from the past.

Monica Snyder: Sure.

Josh Brahm: I’m tracking with that. There’s no evidence of it being a thing, but I understand why people would sometimes kind of grab onto, “I think that’s just kind of how the universe works.” I can get that. And yet it’s surprising to me a little bit that this specific version of…kind of reincarnation happens, and it feels to me – and tell me if you disagree – but it comes across to me as that deeply wishful thinking of a, like, “I’m trying to figure this out. I don’t want to have this abortion. And how much better or comforting is the thought that this isn’t really a killing.”

Monica Snyder: Well I definitely think it’s wishful thinking.

Josh Brahm: Yeah.

Monica Snyder: But I get the strong psychological motivations to believe those things. And I don’t think – I don’t like to use the word reincarnation because in my mind that implies some kind of consciously-thought-out doctrine or specific religious belief. And I suspect for a lot of the people talking about this, they’re not thinking the word “reincarnation.” They’re just thinking…like, the spiritual, not religious, vaguely, “I don’t know who, how things could work or what could be out there, but I’m hoping this is how, you know – I’m hoping that I can see you again some other time.”

Josh Brahm: Yeah. And I think what I’m trying to say – is that I think there are people who, like, would defend reincarnation as, like, their worldview. And I’m saying, I don’t think all of these women you are describing fall into that camp.

Monica Snyder: No.

Josh Brahm: I think that there are some women who are like, this is the first time that they’ve kind of thought of the idea of maybe a soul being [unintelligible]

Monica Snyder: I think it’s almost entirely ad hoc. I think that it’s a way of processing and hoping.

Josh Brahm: They’re believing what they need to believe, which is something that everyone does sometimes.

Monica Snyder: Oh yeah. No, I get it.

Josh Brahm: So there’s no negative judgment or anything from me on this.

Monica Snyder: As someone who like…I’ve had two miscarriages and I’m an atheist and I experienced a very strong pull to want to believe all kinds of things. It makes sense.

Josh Brahm: Totally understand.

Monica Snyder: Yeah.

Josh Brahm: Okay. I’m glad you told me about that because that is…I don’t read the Shout Your Abortion hashtag very much anymore.

Monica Snyder: It’s interesting. You would think that it would be mostly, “I did it, I’m not sorry. Now I have this great career,” and there are some like that, but it is stunning to me how many of the stories involve deep sorrow and grief. It doesn’t seem like “shout your abortion.” And consistently it’s like, “I have no regrets, but I cry every single day.” “I have no regrets, but I still grieve it.” And regret and grief are not the same thing, to be fair.

Josh Brahm: Yes, yes.

Monica Snyder: But it’s just weird because we talk about regret – both sides talk about regret – and I think it’s too one dimensional. And I think sometimes when pro-life people say that she’ll regret it, what they mean is it’s going to hurt a lot. And then the other side says, “Well, they said they didn’t regret it. They just cry every day.” And you’re like, “Okay, I feel like you might be making my point.”

And don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying everyone cries every day. They don’t. But it’s amazing how many Shout Your Abortion stories involve zero social support. Sometimes the partner or the parents [are] actively defying you and belittling you and all sorts of really difficult situations.

There’s so many of them where it’s like – there was one I read where she was feeling just so heartbroken and she went and sat outside a cemetery and she made a little bundle of flowers for herself and, like, had her own private ceremony to grieve. So you’ve got this Twitter rhetoric of “clump of cells,” “We’re ending a process happening in our body. And what’s the big deal?” It’s just a farce. For both sides it’s a farce. I’m sure there are some non-zero-number of women who get abortions who are like, “Clump of cells, I don’t care.” But for the most part – please, okay? It’s a joke –

Josh Brahm: It’s much more complicated.

Monica Snyder: – it’s a frigging joke, okay? People are feeling any which way about it, but there is some recognition on both sides – now they may – now, I’m not saying they think, “Oh, this is a fully valuable human baby.”

Josh Brahm: Of course.

Monica Snyder: But it’s also not, “Clump of cells, who cares?” Like, give me a break.

Josh Brahm: So interesting because I mean, as someone – I feel like I’ve really tried not to put people in boxes, you have challenged an assumption that I would have made about anyone using #ShoutYourAbortion. And I haven’t read that hashtag in quite a while.

Monica Snyder: I think the idea of it was one certain way. But that’s not how it has manifested.

Josh Brahm: Right, and that was the other thing I was going to say. It’s, how frustrating must those people be to the original people –

Monica Snyder: Well, they don’t have to publish it and they do. So…you know?

Josh Brahm: Oh. It’s just like they’re..?

Monica Snyder: There are people who run these Shout Your Abortion accounts and they republish these stories that are submitted, you know, it’s not like it’s…

Josh Brahm: Why? What do you think? Why?

Monica Snyder: I think they want people to understand that a lot of people need abortions and they are allowed to talk about it and they don’t have to just hide in silence and not explain why they did it and what they’re going through. And some of them don’t feel grief or regret. They just feel relief. Some of them feel joy. That is true.

Josh Brahm: Right.

Monica Snyder: And some of them feel deep grief and still don’t regret it and want it to be a legal option. And I think the people who run Shout Your Abortion want you to understand that. They want you to understand these are real human women that you know them, you love them. They’re going through a lot. They’re full human beings with complicated situations. And when you’re just like, “Abortion kills humans, end of story,” you’re skipping over so much, and we want to have a broader conversation about who’s getting abortions and why. And to some extent, I agree with them. I still have the sticking point about killing valuable human beings, but I also think that there’s…Yeah.

I also think that, in some ways – at least from what I’ve been reading of it – it is undermining some of the pro-choice rhetoric, too. When people say, “Trust women, they know what’s best for their lives,” I get it on some level. But how many of them think that what would really be best for their lives is, they could get the help they need to not have to do this? Very few of these stories do sound like, “I’ll get an abortion, I’m not even sorry, and now I can go on to win this Grammy” or whatever you’re doing. That’s not much of it, I don’t think.

Josh Brahm: Yeah. I’m just really glad that you’re sharing about that. Okay. So back to your…just, what happened –

Monica Snyder: Back to the clinic, So –

Josh Brahm: Yeah, the story.

Monica Snyder: Yes. So anyway, I’m telling you my impressions and all the things I didn’t expect. It was very emotional.

Josh Brahm: It’s really helpful.

Monica Snyder: Basically, I go in there, I check in, I pay in cash. I asked them if that was weird. They said it wasn’t. $11,400, the most cash I’ve ever carried in my life – Just for a side note, not my cash, right?

Josh Brahm: Yeah, I kind of assumed this probably because –

Monica Snyder: – The people I’m working with figured that out –

Josh Brahm: – This is an investment into…obviously…

Monica Snyder: Yeah, are you kidding? I shop at Goodwill, okay? So waiting in the waiting room for a while, they call me back, bloodwork, vitals. There were two different staff, one of them in particular, I actually – no joke – really liked her. Really sweet, maternal, supportive. I totally believe that she believes she is doing this to help people. She’s been doing it for years. We talked about her kids, my husband, whatever. I got along with her fine.

I did not ask to see the ultrasound and she did not offer, which I expected. She did not…I’m trying to remember what I even asked her. There’s footage of it on YouTube. But she…I asked her, “Will they feel pain?” “No, they won’t.” We talked about the procedure. “How’s it gonna work?” I had some more specific questions about how the extraction works and what will happen then. And she answered pretty candidly, I thought.

But there were some things where I was like, “Can I talk to the doctor who’s going to be the one doing it?” Because the nurses don’t do that part. They do prep work and medication. She said, “Yeah, you’ll be able to talk to him. You can ask him any questions you need to,” and so on and so forth. Then I go back to the waiting room and wait a while.

Different nurse calls me back to do medications. Kind of asked her some of the same questions. Still tearful, especially when I asked about the pain thing. I remember she said, “She will not feel anything. We do it as humanely as possible.” And then she said something about how, by the time you wake up, she will have passed away. And they mirror your language. They don’t say “the fetus” or whatever, which I think is smart. It’s just stupid not to.

Josh Brahm: Meaning, if you were using the word “baby,” they would use the word “baby.”

Monica Snyder: Right, yep. Saying pronouns. You know, who are we kidding? They’re not saying “the pregnancy.” All that stuff. The whole time this is all happening, Ruby is moving. Then I asked her some other specific questions about the thing, and she said, “That would be a better question for the doctor, because he’s the one doing it.” Fair enough. I asked her if I could talk to him. “You’ll get to talk to him before you start.” “Okay.”

And then she has three medications she wants to give me, and that is a pain med and an antibiotic and Xanax…which is to keep you calm. Anti-anxiety. And if you don’t already know – and I wasn’t totally sure about this in that very moment – but it has known and common side effects having to do with cognition and memory and sleepiness and all these things. That’s not the point of it. Those are side effects. But they are common sometimes 10% or 20% of the time, okay? I did not want to take a Xanax because I wanted to leave, but also because I hadn’t talked to the doctor yet, and I was intending to.

And so I said, you know, “Hold up. Can I speak to the doctor first and then take these?” She’s like, “Well, not really because you need X amount of time for them to get into your system before he can start the dilation, you know, and they’ve got a tight schedule.” They did have a lot of people there because of earlier cancellations because of weather and different things. And so she said, “You really need to take them now and then talk to him.” I was like, “Okay, well, would taking Xanax affect my clarity of thinking?” And she’s like, “No, it shouldn’t.”

That is not true. I don’t know if she knows that’s not true or not, although it would be weird if she didn’t because she’s a nurse and she’s giving it to people. So if she doesn’t know – she’s either lying or she’s not doing her job sufficiently well, because that is totally untrue.

One of my sisters is a doctor. And my sister didn’t know I was doing this. Almost nobody knew I was doing this, because until they decide if they’re going to release the footage or not, you don’t talk to anybody about it. I messaged her later. I message my sister about abortion debate related things all the time. So I didn’t even have to explain it. I was like, “Hey, somebody told me that if you take Xanax, it won’t affect your clarity of thinking. It was in the context of if a patient has to take it before they get an abortion.” She was like, “What!? That is…Man, people say the stupidest things.” She thinks I’m talking about Reddit.

Josh Brahm: Right, right.

Monica Snyder: No, that is not true! I’m like, “Oh my gosh.”

Josh Brahm: That makes me mad.

Monica Snyder: Anyway, that was later. So she says, “Will it affect your clarity of thinking?” “Oh, no, it shouldn’t.” “Okay.” Contextualizing, this is talking to a woman getting a 28-week abortion who has been crying on and off and doesn’t seem – she has lots of questions.

Josh Brahm: Right!

Monica Snyder: She has a lot of questions, she’s crying, she’s kinda taking her time. And you’re like, “Take the Xanax and then you can talk to him.”

Josh Brahm: She wants you to take the Xanax, right?

Monica Snyder: And the most generous interpretation, the most generous plausible interpretation? She’s got a lot of people to get through and I’m taking forever.

Josh Brahm: Right.

Monica Snyder: I don’t think it’s necessary that she’s like, “Yes, do it so we can make $11,000.” I don’t know if she even cares. But she definitely wants me to take the Xanax and move on with my life.

Josh Brahm: She thinks it’s going to help you.

Monica Snyder: Yeah. Well, and that’s the other thing too. There’s a paternalism here where they’re like, “If I can just get her through this, her life will be better for it.” I mean, I don’t know if that’s what this specific individual is thinking. I just feel like there’s an undercurrent of that.

Josh Brahm: I know that exists because I have literally heard that from people who used to work in abortion clinics that have expressed that kind of a thing.

Monica Snyder: Well, and you see it throughout anyway when they talk about how you shouldn’t even have to offer the option of the ultrasound. They shouldn’t have to listen to a fetal development description, and even if it’s accurate, they think that you’re making it harder for them. What does that mean? Why would it be harder for them if they’re sure? This is reality, right? Anyway.

So, I was like, “Clarity of thinking no, it shouldn’t.” And then I was like – again, I’m not…I don’t have a problem with confrontation. I was like, “Hmm, I don’t mind staying longer today if it means I can talk to him first and then take this and wait.” And she was like, “Yeah, that’s…That’s not how we do it.” She wouldn’t do it. So I was like, “Okay.” And then I’m in an awkward position because I’m not going to take this Xanax.

Josh Brahm: You’re wanting to talk to the doctor, but you’re not going to take this Xanax.

Monica Snyder: I’m not going to take this Xanax. I don’t want to take anything they gave me. I mean, don’t get me wrong, I believe it really was like acetaminophen and antibiotic and Xanax, but like, “How far are we going to take this?” And so I said, “I’m just going to step out and call my husband one more time.”

And I could tell – or, I could be misinterpreting – but I believe she was slightly irritated because she’s got a lot to do and I’m like hemming and hawing. But she didn’t – she wasn’t rude. She was like, “Okay, sure. And you can just take this when you get back.” And I was like, “Okay.” So I did step out. I did call my husband for real. And he didn’t pick up the phone, which I didn’t actually need to talk to him. I just – you know. And then I called –

Josh Brahm: Was this to give you a moment of, like, “Let me figure out what I’m going to do now?”

Monica Snyder: No, I knew that – yeah, I was trying to think about – but I knew I was probably going to leave now because I’m not taking this medication. But I didn’t want to just be like, “You know what? Never mind, bye.”

Josh Brahm: Okay, it’s kind of a cover because it seems like you’re as far as… yeah –

Monica Snyder: Well and also, based on the way I’ve been behaving the entire time, I don’t think anyone’s going to be shocked if I’m like, “Never mind.” And I bet I’m not the first person to have ever done that. And so I did step out. He didn’t pick up. I called one of the people that was coordinating this with me and talked about what happened. And they were like, “Do not take any medication.” And I was like, “I wasn’t planning to.” They’re like, “Yeah, don’t.” Yeah, okay.” And then they’re like, “You should just go. It’s time.” Okay.

So then I went back in. I was crying again, just in the whole thing. And the irony was – I forget when this happened in the time frame – but there was one point when I was sitting in the waiting room and I was kind of crying. And one of the other women in the waiting room was like, “Are you okay?” And I wanted to be like, “I’m okay. Are you okay?” But I was just like, “Yeah, thank you. I’ll be fine,” kind of thing. And again, feeling that whole uncertainty.

And then I just went up to the window – I was still crying – and I was like, “I changed my mind. I’m not going to do it.” And they were like, “Okay.” They took out fees for the ultrasound and gave back the rest. That’s the other thing people ask. They’re like, “Oh, they’re just going to keep it.” They didn’t keep it. That would be super illegal and something that probably a lot of people, however they feel about abortion:  “Give me my money back,” kind of thing. But they didn’t do that.

And then I left. And then – okay, I’m very extroverted. I get energy from other people, right? I was exhausted. I could not stop crying the whole way home – “home” – the hotel I was staying at. All I wanted to do was lie on my hotel bed and feel Ruby kick and remind myself that, you know –

Josh Brahm: – you’re pregnant –

Monica Snyder: – it’s over –

Josh Brahm: – she’s ok –

Monica Snyder: She’s fine. Those guys aren’t, but it’s whatever. And then also just the bizarreness of experiencing so much of that firsthand, seeing exactly how it goes, and knowing – and this is exactly what happened – that a whole lot of people are still not going to believe me. There’s nothing I could do. I could literally be the one recording it in real time and showing it to you and telling you I experienced it firsthand. And you will not believe me. And to be fair, some of them won’t believe me because I’m a pro-life activist. You know, they don’t trust me. I have a bias here, a very obvious bias. Okay? But that’s why I recorded it.

Josh Brahm: And it’s also not – and I hate to say this – but it’s also not like conservatives, and even pro-lifers who’ve done things like this, have never deceptively edited things. Like there has been stuff.

Monica Snyder: Sure. But so it’s interesting, because we did all this work – and you don’t know when you do this if they’re ever going to use your footage or not. You give it to them and they figure out if they think it will be helpful or not. And that was the deal you signed up for. So I was glad when they did decide they were going to use it. And a big part of the reason they did was because the Xanax thing, because that was unusual. That was a new thing. Because I never got to talk to the doctor. When I left, I was like, “All of that, all of that time and prep and emotional energy, and I didn’t even see the doctor,” right?

Josh Brahm: Was that like the primary goal? Was that the hope?

Monica Snyder: Yes, yes. But it turned out that the Xanax thing was a big deal. We actually filed a complaint with the DC Medical Board about that, which I don’t expect anything to come of at all. Look at Justice for the Five. They didn’t even investigate that. “It’s fine. Nothing to see here,” right? But we did what we could. You throw everything at the wall, you see what sticks.

So we filed a complaint with them. They released the footage. And sure enough, of course, of course, people say “heavily edited”…There’s nothing in the footage that they released that mentions I’m 28 weeks. So they say that she was 28 weeks and people are like, “No, she wasn’t.”

We actually have a recent secular pro-life supporter – very smart guy – and he said, “Oh, I’ve used this footage in so many of my conversations. It’s extremely effective.” Not online, but people he knows. And he said he did get some pushback with her, like, “How do you know it’s 28 weeks?” And so he went and found my birth announcement and he calculated back. And he was like, “Well, she said she had the baby on this day. She has pictures of the baby and this would have been then, so, ah, 28 weeks.” You know? So I was like, “Dang, you’re good.”

Josh Brahm: And that would be, like – if you were trying to make stuff up, that would be like the weirdest thing to be lying about.

Monica Snyder: Well, they want to believe that if this does happen, it’s only to “whatever-” weeks.

Josh Brahm: Oh, okay, they’re hoping that you’re actually like 22 weeks or 18 or something.

Monica Snyder: Yeah, and that we just edited it out of the footage and we’re like, “Oh, it’s 28 weeks.” No, I was literally 28 weeks.

Josh Brahm: I’m tracking now. Okay.

Monica Snyder: Also, they want to believe that, somewhere else that’s not in the footage that we released, that I said that my baby had anencephaly or that I said that I had preeclampsia. They want to believe there’s something else I said that convinced them that we’re leaving out. And so that’s why it doesn’t make sense because “Really, I lied to them and it’s for a severe fetal anomaly.” And I get why they want to believe that. I really do, okay? That did not happen.

And what I am telling you goes with all the evidence we already have listed on our website about this stuff. And with abortion rights proponents research when they talk about this and they say, you know, “You need to let it be for any gestational age because some women will need it because they didn’t know they were pregnant,” that has nothing to do with anencephaly, right? So I expected “Heavily edited, heavily edited, heavily edited, heavily edited.” We all expect that, right? What I did not expect – and this actually almost just amused me – is some people said it was staged, meaning we had to make up an entire clinic.

Josh Brahm: Wait, that you built multiple sets?

Monica Snyder: So like the whole thing is staged. So like this nurse actress, right? And me an actress, and we’re all just acting out this amazing facade, you know, in order for – and I don’t know if they even thought that much through when they said the word “staged.” But I was like, “heavily edited is one thing. That would, like, not be that hard to do. Staged? You are giving us way too much credit.

Josh Brahm: And you are not that good of an actress.

Monica Snyder: I’m not that good of an actress! And also just like, just the overhead of doing that would be crazy, right? So “staged.” And there were people who on our side who were impressed with how well I pretended to be pregnant. I wasn’t pretending to be pregnant, guys. I was actually pregnant, okay? With an actual, you know, live fetus, right?

Josh Brahm: This would have ended so quickly if you weren’t actually pregnant.

Monica Snyder: This is the internet. You know, you can find anything on the internet. But there are some people who are like, “This doesn’t make any sense because it’s illegal to record healthcare conversations. So how did she get this video?” And I’m like, “Do you know what the word ‘undercover’ means? It says in the title, ‘undercover.’ ”

Josh Brahm: Right. Investigative journalism. This is not a new thing.

Monica Snyder: “What do you think is happening?” Yeah. But the most common one was “heavily edited,” “no proof it’s 28 weeks.” And I expected this too, before I did it, which is what happened where people are like, you know, “She’s getting all emotional about the lies she has scared herself with,” you know, “I have built up this narrative in my head of what’s happening with these women. And that’s not what’s happening. And I’m crying at my own false narrative in my head. And everyone’s wondering when the crazy person will get out of the clinic because” –

Josh Brahm: But that’s reaching.

Monica Snyder: But that’s definitely things people have said, you know? Yeah.

So I wrote an opinion piece that was published in the Washington Times saying a lot of things I’m telling you. And I tried very much – I went back and forth with the people I worked with on this, on how they wanted to go and how I wanted to go. We do not have the same style. Mine is a very, “Here’s exactly what happened.” And I feel like sometimes theirs is like trying to make it a little more, you know, like the… like the clickbait-y kind of thing. And I get it.

But one of the things I wanted to mention was how I genuinely liked the first nurse I talked to and she was very sweet and supportive because that’s the truth. And because I want to emphasize that I’m not trying to just spin all of this in my direction, you know? And also, we – our side – needs to accurately understand what is going on and who we’re dealing with. It’s not going to help us to, you know, make them into Snidely Whiplashes. Right?

And so anyway, the reason I bring it up is because somebody – you know, we have a very dedicated set of trolls on Twitter, a lot of them, very dedicated. And one of them was like, “She said something about how you even admitted that they were, you know, kind of trying to help you and you were lying to them and da da da da da.” And I was like, “Yeah. Continue. What else? I know I said that. I was there, you know, I’m aware.” Anyway.

Josh Brahm: Like, “Gotcha! I found your own words!”

Monica Snyder: “You got me. How did you figure that out?” It was, oh, I’m not kidding, a life changing experience. And I – another context of this I didn’t mention before – So I have four live children. I have a son who was a twin, lost the twin, had another miscarriage after that, and then had this last pregnancy. So this was a rainbow baby. The whole pregnancy was under a shadow. And I felt even, you know, more protective of her than previous pregnancies because of those experiences. And so that also added an edge to it.

And even after that was over, I left DC, I went home, it’s been months, you know, 28 weeks, I still have, you know, a lot of the pregnancy left to go. I thought about it all the time. I thought about it when she moved. I thought about it when I did checkups. Every checkup I had after that, I thought about the women in those clinic. I thought about when I gave birth. I have thought about it when I have held her countless times since then. She is seven months old now. I think about it all the time. I think it has changed my relationship with her.

Josh Brahm: Really?

Monica Snyder: And she will never understand that or know, but…

Josh Brahm: In what way?

Monica Snyder: I still think about how – this doesn’t make any sense, okay? I still think about how it feels like she was in danger and now she’s safe.

Josh Brahm: Yeah.

Monica Snyder: And I’m glad she’s safe and I feel, like, a little on edge. And part of that –

Josh Brahm: Does it feel like you both went through almost like a shared trauma thing, experience together?

Monica Snyder: I mean, it’s weird to say that because she doesn’t think so. But like –

Josh Brahm: I understand. I don’t know better language for it.

Monica Snyder: I feel like, between having two miscarriages before her and then doing this also, I feel like…I’m so glad she’s okay. And I mean, obviously, I’m glad all of my kids are okay, but I feel like she came close to the edge and came back, but she didn’t. She’s been healthy – the whole pregnancy was healthy. There was no problem. There was no problem with the birth, there was no problem postpartum. If you didn’t know anything about me and just had, like, my medical records, there was no problem with her at any point. But I feel like it was really close, and I have to reassure myself that she’s okay.

I had a dream two weeks ago that there was some kind of world-record-breaking tidal wave and I had her and I was trying to climb the stairs of this building and I knew the tidal wave was going to submerge the whole building, at least for a little while. And I was trying to figure out how long she could hold her breath. And then I woke up and I was just like, “There are no tidal waves in Missouri. Everything is fine.”

And to be fair, those dreams aren’t uncommon with any newborn, the vulnerability of them. I had protective dreams with my other newborn children, too. So I’m not saying [that] it’s just that, but there’s something with her. I think about it all the time. I think about her being there with me. I think about the other women who were there. I think about the women who are there right now while we’re talking, the women who’ve been there since, the kids who went in with them and didn’t come out. Right? I think about… I think about all of it.

And it’s weird because like I said, I’ve been pro-life activist at least since 2009 and I’ve cared about this issue the whole time. But I do feel like it was a life-altering experience and I did not expect that at all. I expected to be irritated. I expected to be nervous. And then I expected to go give them the information and move on. And I feel like it changed my life.

Josh Brahm: Yeah. So that doesn’t surprise me at that point.

Monica Snyder: It surprised me.

Josh Brahm: Yeah, I understand. I mean, I’ve tried to explain sometimes to people that – because there are pro-life activists that have never been in front of an abortion clinic.

Monica Snyder: Sure.

Josh Brahm: And you were inside of one. But I’m saying like, even…it’s like, I kind of feel like every pro-life activist who’s spent a little bit of time at least in front of a place –

Monica Snyder: Yeah, I agree, I agree.

Josh Brahm: – where like you’re seeing – even if you’re just there to hold a sign or pray or whatever – to see women go in pregnant and to see them walk out not…

Monica Snyder: Just to help ground yourself that this is a real phenomenon we’re dealing with.

Josh Brahm: This is real.

Monica Snyder: Yeah. It’s not just an online debate.

Josh Brahm: Like, you need that.

Monica Snyder: And the online debate does matter.

Josh Brahm: Yes.

Monica Snyder: But like it’s difficult because you have us trying to sway an entire nation in a certain direction, which is going to be slow and over time and incremental and “don’t worry about how much it works, just do what you can.” And that’s mostly where I live.

But when you’re at a clinic – you don’t have to be inside it, you can be outside of it – and you’re thinking about how for this individual person walking in right now, it’s not some theoretical political debate for their kid or for them.

And again, I am not trying to say that every single woman who gets an abortion needs and wants us to save them. I’m not saying that. But I do think a lot of them would rather have not been doing this. And I think both us and the pro-choice side and Republican and Democratic politicians, whoever the powers may be, could be doing more. And I think there should be plenty of common ground for us to work on together to make that happen. I don’t think that should be controversial.

Josh Brahm: No. And it’s also an argument – and I agree with everything you just said, but instead of repeating what you just said, I’ll just add one more – it also goes to explain why it is so – if there could be well trained, kind, loving sidewalk counselors in front of every abortion clinic during all of their open hours – because I believe that plausibly some of those women that you saw in the waiting room, they might have changed [their mind] just if someone outside had offered another option.

Monica Snyder: We know that that is true, Josh. We know it’s true. I can’t say for the specific individuals, the specific time that I went, but broadly speaking, we know that we have people who are sidewalk counselors because a sidewalk counselor turned them around. We have people who are sidewalk counselors because no one was there for them and they got an abortion. We have people who have changed their mind because of the rescue movement, too.

I understand it’s controversial. I’m not taking a side. I’m just saying that we know there are some women that even at the 11th hour, even if they’re sitting in the clinic, we know that if you give them the information, some of them call that number and leave.

Josh Brahm: This is, like, one of the main points that we made in this sidewalk counseling masterclass. And every speech about it is trying to help people understand.

If you can understand anything about sidewalk counseling, understand this: that as incredible as Jacob is at that, which is why we’ve based the entire course on the way that he does it because he has a very unique kind of ERI-style way of doing it. I love it. But as good as he is at that, – and there are times where you’re going to need a lot of those skills that he’s using – but there are so many people that literally, it’s just your presence that makes all the difference. You don’t have to have all these things to say.

Monica Snyder: They might not even talk to you. They might just see your sign that says, “We can help you; here’s a number,” and they don’t talk to you and they still leave. And I’m not saying everybody, a lot of people don’t. I get it.

Josh Brahm: And it seems illogical to pro-lifers who are distant from the thing, but I’ve talked to women who have described of their abortion day a decade ago or whatever, going to the abortion clinic and, in their mind, having made an agreement with themself that it’s like, “I’m just looking for a sign. If there is anything that I can perceive, even if they’re not religious, just something like the universe, is providing them a sign –

Monica Snyder: Yes, yes, yes.

Josh Brahm: – then I will stop. And then they say, “And there were no pro-lifers in front of the building. There were no billboards. There was no anything. And so I went in and I had the abortion. I didn’t really want to.”

Monica Snyder: We did an interview for our blog about this that I found extremely impactful over this woman named Gabriella who, – and I apologize to her in advance if I don’t get the story exactly right now, because this was a little bit ago – but she talked about how she got pregnant, you know, by mistake, she panicked, and she went and got an abortion. And almost as soon as it was done, she realized she’d made a horrible mistake. She wished she had waited a little bit longer, thought a little bit more.

And she talked about how there were sometimes counselors in front of that clinic, but not the day that she went. And now she counsels in front of that clinic, the clinic where she got the abortion years ago: she counsels in front of that clinic. And the whole reason she does it is because she doesn’t want anyone else to go through what she went through. Right?

In some sense – and she does care about the prenatal life – but for her, the big thing was what she went through: the woman. And she wants to make sure she’s there if somebody else is in her position, you know, “You don’t have to do this. Look, if you are determined that you want to do this, and it is legal, I can’t stop you. I’m just saying if there is some part of you that could use some other help, I can help you,” you know?

And this is what’s so frustrating about the whole sidewalk counselor thing. I recognize there are people outside of clinics that are a bunch of jerks. Right?

Josh Brahm: Yes, yes.

Monica Snyder: I think that they irritate us probably as much as they do the other side, because they’re completely undermining –

Josh Brahm: It’s the most common question we’ve gotten since we put out the Sidewalk Counseling Master Class.

Monica Snyder: What’s that?

Josh Brahm: It’s, “What do I do? –

Monica Snyder: “How do I get rid of this guy?”

Josh Brahm: – about these – this guy with a bullhorn and a big graphic sign who is basically chasing women into the clinic with Bible verses.

Monica Snyder: Yeah. Are we sure he’s not a sleeper agent? Like, what is…

Josh Brahm: I’m pretty confident – like, I guess… Because there have been cases where it’s like some pro-lifer will end up –

Monica Snyder: Of course he’s not, but I’m just saying, good grief.

Josh Brahm: It’s usually someone – it might be, like, an abolitionist. There’s usually a really strong anti-Catholic thing and a Calvinist thing.

Monica Snyder: Okay. That’s definitely my main concern right now.

Josh Brahm: Right, I know. It’s like the weirdest thing ever. But anyway, it’s usually like a Calvinist thing. And I’m sorry, it’s just true. I have a lot of experience with these guys. They’re for reals, but their theological view is basically, they don’t even need to track with their effectiveness, because –

Monica Snyder: There is a secular equivalent of this too. It doesn’t even have to be theological. It’s just like, “My job is to say the truth,

Josh Brahm: Right.

Monica Snyder: I’m like, “Great. Thank you for that.

Josh Brahm: And I care about us actually helping people, and –

Monica Snyder: I mean, I don’t wanna – I’m not… I’m not saying –

Josh Brahm: Of course we’re not gonna lie to them.

Monica Snyder: Right.

Josh Brahm: But it’s more complicated than just saying true facts.

Monica Snyder: There are better and worse ways to do this. “Do you care about – What is your metric of success?”

Josh Brahm: Right.

Monica Snyder: “What’s your metric of success? Do you guys know what I’m saying?”

Josh Brahm: There’s a woman who interviewed to come to – as my assistant a while back, and she did sidewalk counseling. So I asked her, “How many babies have you saved?” She’s like, “She either said none or like, one or two.” And she’d been doing it for like five years or something. And I’m like, “You need to reconsider the way that you do this because that’s not a good…” There are sidewalk counselors –

Monica Snyder: You gotta pump those numbers up. Those are rookie numbers.

Josh Brahm: – who are seeing lives saved every week or whatever.

Monica Snyder: Right, right.

Josh Brahm: Like maybe the methodology is –

Monica Snyder: Flawed.

Josh Brahm: – part of the thing, here.

Monica Snyder: We could use a scientific method here. We could examine this. Yep.

Josh Brahm: We really could. So people, please – sidewalk council – I know it’s scary. We have a course.

Monica Snyder: And all the sidewalk counselors I’ve talked to say that. They’re like, “We just need more people. You don’t have to be good at it. You don’t even have to say anything.” You know?

Josh Brahm: Yeah.

Monica Snyder: And sometimes too, by the way, just as a practical point, sometimes they just need you there too because it’s safer for them if there’s more than one person there.

Josh Brahm: Yes.

Monica Snyder: You don’t even have to talk to anyone going in and out of the clinic.

Josh Brahm: You’re just the one with the camera phone ready in case something crazy happens.

Monica Snyder: Or just the extra eyeballs. Or just –  or they need someone like, “Hey, can someone run and get some food? I don’t want to leave and abandon my post.” Right? There are lots of logistical things that they need, and you don’t even have to talk to anybody. But if you did want to, you don’t have to be the super-persuasive, “I have the answers to everything.” You can just be like, “Can I help you?” You know?

Josh Brahm: There are very easy 101 ways to do this.

Monica Snyder: You know, it’s funny. I went to the tragically-named Hope Clinic for Women. It is in Southern Illinois. It is right across the river from St. Louis, Missouri. So Missouri has banned abortion at conception, etc. And the Hope Clinic for Women is one of the geographically-closest clinics. And for people who aren’t familiar with the geography of Missouri, St. Louis, which is the largest city, is literally on the river across from Illinois. When they say, “Oh, you have to leave Missouri to go to Illinois,” for all the people in St. Louis, that’s like a 20-minute drive.

But anyway, it’s called the Hope Clinic for Women. It’s got a bunch of, you know, rainbow signs and Black Lives Matter and all kinds of unironic, you know, stuff. I went there a couple months ago with Terrisa. She wanted to meet one of the counselors there, so she was talking to him, and I was kind of just talking to other people over there.

And there was this pair of women there –I thought this was funny – one of them was a sidewalk counselor, and she has her brochures, and she has her – I think I could be wrong…I remember her having a rosary. I think she did. Something prayer-related, you know? And, you know, she’s standing on the legal section where the sidewalk is, and there’s a driveway, and she would chat with me, but she would, you know, go if people are coming. She’s like, “Do you want a brochure?” Most of them ignore her. It’s fine.

But what’s funny is, the other woman she was with is not a sidewalk counselor, and she finds it intimidating to approach cars and to talk to people. And that – I get that. But here’s the funny part. She was a rescuer. And so by that, if you don’t know, I mean that she had, in her past at some point – I don’t think recently – had gone into clinics. And in her case – like, there’s different forms of rescue. Some of them go in just long enough to give people information, and then they bail, right?

But some of them, they won’t leave. They will not leave until they are arrested, right? So she’s, like, willing to be arrested. To her, that’s fine. But to approach women going in and try to talk to them? Too intimidating.

Josh Brahm: I’m having a hard time wrapping my mind around this one.

Monica Snyder: Different personality, man. I think she just felt like – I’m speculating – but I think she just felt like, maybe she’s not very conversationally persuasive, but she doesn’t have a problem just sitting here. You know? Different personality.

Josh Brahm: It feels kind of like a warrior inside.

Monica Snyder: Yeah, exactly. She’s, like, fine with that kind of confrontation. But there’s a lot on the line when you’re talking to the woman going in, you know? And you have to – and I don’t pretend to know how to do this, obviously, given what I just told you – you have to be prepared emotionally for them to not listen to you.

Josh Brahm: Yes.

Monica Snyder: Maybe many times over. You know, how do you do that? Right? It’s a hard thing. I don’t pretend to have all the answers there.

Josh Brahm: You remember that in the end, you just try to be that last potential help, and you know that they still have free will, and that it’s not going to work out every time, and it’s not your fault.

Monica Snyder: I believe that I have a moral obligation to do what I can with what I have, and if it’s not enough, it’s not enough. But if I don’t even try, what is that? You know? You can’t feel the way that I feel about this issue and then be like, “But, you know, what if somebody yells at me?”

Josh Brahm: Right. Well, I’m really grateful that you did this, that you’re sharing the story. I feel like I’ve learned a lot from hearing it. I feel really, really empathetic toward you. I know I can’t fully imagine what you experienced, but I know it was not a walk in the park.

Monica Snyder: It’s much different than I thought. Yeah.

Josh Brahm: Wow. So we’ll point people to the video and they can see.

Monica Snyder: Sure.

J; I haven’t seen it.

Monica Snyder: Well, they never did – as far as I know, they never did release the full footage, which is unfortunate a little bit. Although part of me is like, how many people who say “heavily edited” actually care if you release full footage?

Josh Brahm: There’s very few that actually watch the full footage, but I kind of think that we probably always should just so we can, if nothing else, say, “Look, if you want to watch the whole thing…”

Monica Snyder: If nothing else, you can see me walk into the building and realize it’s not a stage. It’s not like a video set or whatever.

Josh Brahm: It would take… People have no understanding of Hollywood, of the amount of money that it takes to put together a good hospital set. It is way more complicated.

Monica Snyder: Just keep that… When you do watch it, keep that in mind.

Josh Brahm: For people, like, watch any – I’m sorry. This – I know this is kind of mean – but watch any movie made by a Christian movie company and look at their sets and be like, “Hey.” As if the pro-life movement could do this.

Monica Snyder: If you have actual medical people watch the show Scrubs, they’ll be like, “No, no, no, no.”

Josh Brahm: Right. No, no. Right.

Monica Snyder: It’s just… It’s implausible. It’s very implausible, but so whatever. That one, I was actually like, “Okay, okay.” I knew..Here’s the reality. There are going to be people who will automatically believe us because they’re pro-life and they will be shook by this. Maybe it’ll shake some of them into activism. And there are going to be people who are not going to believe us no matter what. And in fairness to them, we have an agenda. We do have an agenda. Right?

But there’s some middle ground there. And my buddy I was just telling you about who’s been using it in his private conversations, right? And I know a couple other people who know me personally and who they said, “I know this woman personally, and I know that she was pregnant and she did this.” And them having that connection to me has been enough for the people they’re talking to, to be like, “We could…” you know – interested in discussing this. Not just like, “Fake.” But it’s always going to be a spread.

I knew before – It was funny. I was actually feeling so ambivalent when they finally released it because part of me was like, “Nobody’s going to listen, anyway.” And I didn’t actually – I felt very ambivalent. I didn’t talk about it on Secular Pro-Life for a little while because I wasn’t yet emotionally prepared. So much of the work that we do, I expect a lot of flack and I don’t care. But this one was so much more emotional for me that I was more dragging my feet to affiliate my name with it because I knew people were going to say that I lied.

What’s funny is, I actually found out it was released because someone I know messaged me and immediately linked me to it and was like, “Is this you?” And I knew they were going to release it soon. I didn’t know when exactly. And she recognized my voice immediately. And I did not expect that at all. And a cousin of mine who I hardly ever talked to, she was like, “Can you call me really quick?” Because she’s really into pro-life stuff too. She’s like, “Am I allowed to ask you if this is you?” And I was like, “Yeah, it’s not… Yes, you can. It is, actually.”

But anyway, I knew before they released it that people wouldn’t believe it. And what can you do? I don’t know. What else can I do? I could not possibly give you more information about later abortion and about how much it doesn’t have to be medical-necessary. I’ve done everything I can do. I’ve literally gone to the clinic and filmed it for you, while I was pregnant, to try to show you this.

It gives me sympathy too, by the way, for, like, animal rights activists. In fact, pick almost any human rights violation. Sometimes in the pro-life movement, we’re like, “How come people don’t care about this?” Oh my gosh, pick a topic. It’s really hard to get people to face it because then it’s unpleasant and they might have to do something. Anyway, okay.

Josh Brahm: Well, thank you for sharing.

Monica Snyder: Yeah.

Related Links:

Watch the video Live Action released from this day 

Learn more about Justice for the Five here

Watch Josh’s emotional interview with Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising’s Terrisa Bukovinac and Lauren Handy

The post Undercover at an Abortion Clinic While 28-Weeks Pregnant (with Secular Pro-Life’s Monica Snyder) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:04:31

Recorded in late 2022, Monica Snyder from Secular Pro-Life joined Josh to film a few episodes on what the pro-life movement should be doing right now. It took us a while to get back to regular podcast editing due to a TON of travel, but everything they said is still relevant.

The discussion includes:
– What do we mean when we use the term “pro-life movement” in this particular discussion?
– Lots of ideas for things that pro-life people can do to fight abortion.
– 4 “unforced errors” Josh is warning pro-lifers to avoid.
– Choosing our terms carefully depending on the context.

Learn more about Secular Pro-Life (and follow them on social media) here.

Note: Monica referenced Amazon Smile which was recently discontinued, because we filmed this late last year.

Transcript:

Thank you to Secular Pro-Life and their volunteers for providing this transcript.

Josh: Welcome back to the Equipped for Life podcast. This is part two with my friend Monica Snyder from Secular Pro-Life. If you didn’t listen to the last episode, stop. Don’t be dumb. Go back, listen to part one; this is all building on that. We’re not gonna repeat stuff from that, it was like an hour or something.

Monica: I mean we might, but….

Josh: Let’s just continue the conversation because I’m trying not to do three-hour-long podcast episodes, which I’m so tempted to basically do with you. And, by the way, I’m curious if you would be interested in us doing two- to three-hour-long podcasts? Let me know if you would want that, because I’m open to it. I like the Joe Rogan/Sam Harris, people doing the long form podcast.

Monica: It’s like one or the other, either Tik Tok or Joe Rogan/Sam Harris, right? Those are the options.

Josh: So I’ve been trying to keep us roughly to like an hour, but I’m wondering if our audience has changed on that because…

Monica: If they are, I’m your girl, because “concise” is not one of my talents.

Josh: We could easily do a two- to three-hour podcast together. So okay, on “What should pro-lifers do,” you had a really interesting discussion question that you added to your outline for this that we’ve never talked about before. But it seems like, of course we should, because we should be defining our terms. And so you’re asking what does the pro-life movement mean? What is that?

Monica: How do we define pro-life movement?

Josh: What do you think are some of the options?

Monica: It depends on how far outside of it you are. I think, way outside of it, they think it means Republican politicians. That’s what they think that it means, which is really unfortunate because I think, way inside of it, that’s like an afterthought actually.

Josh: What do you mean by that?

Monica: I mean that when I’m doing pro-life activism, Republican politicians or any politicians really are sort of a side topic, where we want to figure out how to interface with them to get them to propose the legislation we want or support or oppose legislation we want. But I don’t necessarily consider them pro-life. They might be pro-life, but to be frank I’m totally agnostic on that. When it comes to politicians, I believe they are what they need to be to keep their jobs.

Josh: Yeah. And we’re going to find out now, I mean…

Monica: We are finding out now!

Josh: We kind of knew… I heard people talk about things before Dobbs was a thing.

Monica: Of course, that they’re like, “they’re just using this as a wedge issue to get votes.” And the other side says that about their side too. Quick side note: right after Dobbs happened and then all of a sudden the Democrats were saying “you’ve got to vote for us so that we codify Roe.” I have friends who are Democrats that are like “Where’ve you been the last several decades? You could have done that the whole time.” So both sides have this problem where they’re like, “You don’t care about what we care about. You care about us voting and donating to you.” And I’m sure there are politicians out there who are sincere; I’m not saying literally nobody. But at best it’s not their main focus. And so, outside of the pro-life movement when people are commenting on an SPL tweet — and we see this all the time — they’ll say “You say you care, but then you vote against this and this.” I literally never voted against any of those things. Do you mean me? Or do you mean like Ted Cruz? Who are you talking to?

Josh: Those are very different people.

Monica: (sarcastically) Because we are obviously one in the same, total monolith, all right!? And so, when people say, “why didn’t the pro-life movement do this,” “why doesn’t the pro-life movement do that.” Back up a second. Who are you talking about, first of all?

Josh: Right, right. It is more diverse than they think. So I really like this thing that Jacob said one time trying to explain this. I remember trying to explain this to the pro-lifers in Ireland when I was there because it was like, “You need to understand this is what’s going to happen to you too.” For the normal person — not inside the pro-life/pro-choice movement — if they drive by Jacob on the sidewalk doing sidewalk counseling, at the abortion clinic where he often is in Georgia, there are multiple groups. There’s another group with bull horns and big graphic signs…

Monica: In their mind, all the same group.

Josh: … saying Bible verses to people and then you’ve got these people over here praying the rosary. And they think this is all the same group and it’s really, really not.

Monica: Yes.

Josh: I mean you are proof that the movement is a very diverse place.

Monica: And we have that happen all the time when people say, “Well you guys say this.” And I’ll sometimes say, “If you could find anywhere, on any of our platforms in 12 years, that I’ve ever said that, I will give you a hundred dollars. I’ve literally never said that because I don’t think that.” But I shouldn’t be so harsh because, like you said, if it’s kind of low information, not really involved, you get these big ideas and then you react. I mean we all do it. So who is the pro-life movement? I don’t think there’s one single answer. One time, years ago — we should do this again — we did a poll to test people’s intuitions about this. Okay, let me back up. There’s two questions: Who’s the pro-life movement? And who is pro-life?

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: Those are different things.

Josh: Yes.

Monica: I’ll focus, I’ll focus. Who is the pro-life movement? In my opinion, the pro-life movement, broadly speaking, is everybody who does pro-life activist work. That is my opinion and so that includes people who work for pro-life organizations. It includes people who don’t formally work for pro-life organizations but have volunteered for them, or even donated to them — I consider donations activist work. It includes people who aren’t involved with the legislative side but they might do sidewalk counseling. It includes people who donate to crisis pregnancy centers. If you are pro-life and you have done, literally, anything about it ever, then I consider you at least nominally part of the pro-life movement.

Josh: Me too. Literally, I was wondering if we would have the same definition and that is the way that I think about it. I would just say, sometimes when we use the phrase “pro-life movement,” I know that I’m sometimes using it just to mean like the big organizations and I am referencing them.

Monica: Sometimes you mean, you know, SBA, SFLA, whatever. And sometimes you mean everybody on the Gallup Poll that says they’re pro-life…

Josh: Right.

Monica: …and those are not the same, not the same at all.

Josh: Yeah, yeah.

Monica: It’s a tricky thing. But it’s important to clarify. We were talking, in the first part of this series, about the amendments that didn’t pass. And a lot of times you’ll see people say “Why doesn’t the pro-life movement take this strategy?” “Why don’t they do that?” I just want to clarify that on every one of those amendments the people working for or against them are different people, in different groups. And there was some national involvement, some national organizations trying to help here and there with different things. I’m not saying there isn’t. But the idea that the pro-life movement is some kind of monolith choosing what to support and what not to — even within the same state you will have different groups with different priorities. Sometimes the different priorities are just different focuses like, some people’s heart is with supporting women in crisis pregnancies, some people’s heart is in having debates, and some people’s heart is in donating to politicians. Sometimes it’s just different focuses. Sometimes it’s literally contradictory priorities where you will have abolitionists on one end and you’ll have incrementalists on another. There’s all kinds of ways you can divide this out.

Josh: Right.

Monica: And so on the outside looking in, they’re like, “Why does your movement…?” My movement, right? I wish, man. I am not in charge. If I was in charge, things would look differently.

Josh: Think in contrast. So I’ve had, at least two or three times, some donor or volunteer tell me, “You what the pro-life movement needs?” Like, they’re gonna tell me now the solution. Like, “If only everyone understood what I understood.” Oh, this happens to me all the time.

Monica: Yes.

Josh: But they’re like, “Here’s what, here’s what we need…”

Monica: “If we just did this…”

Josh: Right. “What we need is our own version of Planned Parenthood. We need one massive pro-life group that shares all the findings…”

Monica: They are very organized.

Josh: “Shares all the office space…”

Monica: “Shares all the color schemes…”

Josh: “…so then you’re paying less than these fixed costs and will unify the whole thing” because everybody hears about pro-life unity — well, not everyone, but there’s a lot of people that care about pro-life unity.

Monica: Could be more efficient …

Josh: If we just did that…. Okay, they’re comparing — they’re wrong anyway, like there’s no way…

Monica: Planned Parenthood is also not a monolith, by the way. They’ve got plenty of internal strife….

Josh: Exactly! And you and I were talking about that…

Monica: They are doing exactly the opposite of what we are talking about. We’re way outside Planned Parenthood, vaguely looking at them, and we see this one Twitter account. If you even look at other abortion clinics and smaller abortion funds, there’s a lot of internal strife in the pro-choice movement about what they should be doing, what their strategy should be. There’s strife between abortion providers and pro-choice activists. There’s strife between people that are more local and people that are more national.

Josh: People who do the abortions think about it super differently than the people who are lobbying.

Monica: And some people think the most important thing is hearts and minds and some people think the most important thing is legislation. Some people think the most important thing is abortion funds, some people think the most important thing is abortion pills. And they have the same issue. It sounds weird — it almost endears me to them because I’m like, “Dude, I know this is difficult.”

Josh: I’m just like, “Hey look people, do the math.” If the pro-choice side which has Planned Parenthood, has a literal billion dollar non-profit on their side, plus NARAL and a couple of the big groups people know about….”

Monica: … you know, they’ve got their hierarchy…

Josh: If they are as divided as THEY are, then what does it mean when you say, “Why doesn’t your movement do this thing?”

Monica: I do wish that we had some kind of better communication, because what I do see sometimes — it’s really frustrating — is you’ll have group A doing project A, and then group X doesn’t know that and they start project A also. And it’s literally the same project and they don’t know.

Josh: Well sometimes it happens on purpose because they are intentionally trying to compete with each other.

Monica: Sometimes, but a lot of times I have had project ideas where I’ll start it and I’ll realize someone has started it already and it would be so much more efficient for me to come alongside them and be like, “How can I support you; you’re already doing it.” But I didn’t know and it’s very difficult to keep track of.

Josh: You are also more collaborative than some pro-life leaders are. So both of those things are a thing and I’m pessimistic because I’ve been around.

Monica: I’m feeling good right now because I was in D.C. not that long ago, and I went to a conference where the whole point of the conference was that a larger pro-life organization had all of this consumer research and they were like, “Please take this and use it for whatever you want.” It was really nice because that whole conference’s theme was How Do We Unify the Pro-Life Movement? And it was one of the large organizations and even they were like, “I don’t know. Here’s what we’re figuring out. What’s working for you guys? What can we do to help support your groups?” And even with those efforts, it’s really, really tricky. How many pro-life organizations do you think there actually are, like formal organizations?

Josh: You mean just national or are you adding in state and local?

Monica: No, everything — state and local. Hundreds, at least.

Josh: Easily hundreds…

Monica: Probably more.

Josh: Probably. There’s gotta be at least a thousand once you add that, I would think. There’s a lot. And they’re all made up of very different kinds of people and with different kinds of experiences, in different ages and different places on the political spectrum. And we fight a lot and we have a lot of internal disagreements.

Monica: And even if we didn’t, we don’t always know what each other are doing. So when people say, “Why didn’t the pro-life movement have this reaction to this amendment?” and then, of course, you have hindsight bias and all these other things…

Josh: Right.

Monica: But it’s much more complicated than that. And that’s not to say there’s no room for critique or improvement — there totally is. But also keep in mind who you are talking about when you say the pro-life movement. And again, I think a big distinction is between politicians ostensibly supporting pro-life goals and actual pro-life activists. In fact, we even saw this in Dobbs. Obviously I’m glad that Dobbs went the way it did. But I was there, outside the Supreme Court, during oral arguments and I reread the oral arguments later and I thought that they could have been much stronger. But I understand, because the person making them was not a pro-life activist. He is an attorney who covers many different things and this was one of them. There were things they asked him that you or I could have answered in great detail because this is all we do, you know.

Josh: Right.

Monica: But that’s not him.

Josh: We did such a long deep dive after the oral argument. It’s like why… (exasperated)

Monica: He’s not a pro-lifer who’s an attorney. He’s an attorney who’s trying to do a pro-life thing and that’s not the same thing. And to be fair, I think the other side felt the same way where, if they were in there they would have asked different questions or had different responses. Those of us who do this every single day, of course it’s going to feel that way, you know? So first it’s like, “What do we mean by the pro-life movement” and here we’re kind of talking about anyone who opposes abortion enough to do anything about it, and I mean anything — I mean talk about it day to day. How many people do you think privately oppose abortion and never speak of it or do anything?

Josh: It’s probably at least tens of thousands.

Monica: Yeah. And on the other side too. This is not an indictment of anybody. I’m just saying there are layers to this; there are tiers of how involved people are, right? So right now I’m not talking to the people who are privately pro-life and don’t want to get involved. That’s a different conversation — although I do want you to get involved. But that’s a different conversation. But for people who are involved, they’ve tracked these amendments that just didn’t pass. They’re tracking what’s going on politically and legislatively and they’re feeling overwhelmed. They’re feeling like we’re losing a lot of ground which I argued in the first part, no, we’re not; we are way ahead. But I get how recency bias makes it feels like we are. What can they do? That’s the question. And I argue actually there’s always something somebody can do. There’s always something you can do, always — whether you’re broke, whether you’re busy, whether you’re an introvert. There’s always work you can do. Now, before I continue, I will plug my side project.

Josh: You have a website for this.

Monica: I have a website for this! I would love to expand it greatly, but it’s still got a lot of stuff on it right now. Now this is — I want to clarify — it is not specifically a secular project. It is a collaborative project. We consulted with you. We consulted with a whole bunch of different groups. This is a collaborative project which is why, when you go to it, you will see that, I think, one out of like every 10 items is a religious-related thing you can do and I am not religious, okay? But the whole point of this project is that everyone can do something, which includes people who are religious, obviously. But it is called HowtoBeProlife.com and it’s literally just a list. And you can sort it. You can sort it [by] if you are busy, if you’re broke, if you’re introverted, or you can just read through the whole thing. And again, right now it has 52 ideas on it — one for each week of a full year — but we hope to add more to it in the future. It includes things you can do if you’re an introvert, for example, and you don’t want to talk to other people about this necessarily. You can write a thank you note to a local city council member who did something useful in the pro-life realm and just be like, “I supported that.” That is pro-life work. You can have a postcard party where you invite just people you’re comfortable with — two people — and you can just get all these postcards and write thank you notes to the right people. Or you can write suggestion notes. Okay, if you’re more extroverted, you can go in person — and this is all legislative-related, but it doesn’t have to be legislative-related. There are so many things you can do that crisis pregnancy centers need help with, that sidewalk counselors need help with. Say you’re not confrontational enough to do sidewalk counseling — welcome to 85% of the population. But, sidewalk counselors do emotionally grueling work and it could be pro-life work for you to just drop by and say “Would you like me to pick you up a cup of coffee? I care about what you’re doing, I appreciate you.”

Josh: Oh my God, having been on the sidewalk before that would have been so amazing.

Monica: And even if they say, “I don’t need a cup of coffee,” that’s not the point. The point is not everybody is screaming at them.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: Okay? That’s the point. Or if that’s not your thing, or maybe you don’t believe in sidewalk counseling — I’m not saying that you do — I’m saying, if you don’t want to take a frontline role, then take a supporting role to them. If you don’t want to take a role with activists, then find people in your community who need help. Students for Life of America has a million ideas of ways you can help make campuses more pro-life, which is super important because, disproportionately, women in their late teens early 20s are the ones often getting abortions. And how can you support them? Do their campuses have policies that support pregnant women — is there a lactation room? Speaking as someone who has breastfed four children, we notice if there’s a lactation room or not, okay?! I don’t mean a bathroom.

Josh: Yeah!

Monica: I mean, it doesn’t have to be a spa. It could just be a place that is private that has a lock. There are things you could do. You could contact local schools and find out what their policies are for those things. Or if you don’t want to even be that confrontational, you can just — we talked about this in the last episode — if nothing else, you can just let people in your life know, if they don’t already, that you don’t agree with abortion and you think it’s problematic. And that sounds very small; it is not very small. Our side suffers from what I call a smaller megaphone. I firmly, firmly believe that on a cultural, national level, there are major institutions who are much more on the pro-choice side than ours and they give out information — not necessarily untrue information. Some of it is untrue, but some of it is just asymmetric in the sense of you’re focusing on some information and not other information. That’s actually the most insidious form. And one [example] is you focus on certain kinds of stories, not other kinds of stories and that leaves people who aren’t super into this with this overall impression of who pro-lifers are and what it means. And so the way an individual private pro-life person can fight that is to be friends with people who aren’t identical to you and let them know that you don’t agree. That’s it; that’s all you’ve got to do. If you want to talk about it, if you want to debate it, you can do that. And I would say too, by the way, when you’re having these conversations in your private life with your family, with your friends and if you dare, with your co-workers, you don’t have to convince them. In fact, I would argue — and I don’t know if you would agree with this — I would not even go into the conversation trying to convince them. I would emphasize to them that you aren’t trying to convince them, just trying to explain where you’re coming from. You don’t need to make them feel defensive or like they need to convince you. You could just say, “This is how I feel about it, and you can think whatever you think.” And I have had, at least all the time I was in California and I had no pro-life friends, plenty of times when I would — and it often wouldn’t be in that same moment — just say “Oh, this is how I feel about this.” But later down the line, weeks, months, years, people would be like “Hey…” So, for example, I have one friend who I’ve been very close friends with for years. And like four or five years into it, she’s visiting me at my house and she says, “I actually have a question about abortion.” I was like, “I can talk about whatever you want, you know.” And she says (and she’s not in this debate; she’s not an activist, she’s pro-choice in the nominal way) “Do you worry about overpopulation?” And I say “Rhat is a good question, so let me elaborate for you.” And then I give her like, “If you want to understand my perspective, here are the premises.” She knew nothing about the debate at all. So I’m not gonna be like “Oh my gosh, I just can’t, I’ve heard this a million times!” No, don’t!

Josh: Right.

Monica: They’re putting their toes in the water. They’re stepping out of their comfort zone. But they were only able to do that because I told them that I was against abortion. Otherwise, it would have never come up. That’s what I’m saying. So if you are seeing these amendments not getting passed, and you’re wishing that Michigan [pro-lifers] had, you know, 200 million more dollars and was able to do something. Yes, I agree. But that doesn’t mean there’s nothing for you to do here. It is not enough for us to sit and say “Well, the pro-life movement should have done it this way.” You might be right; I’m not even saying you’re wrong! I’m just saying you can always do something. And if you are critiquing, you better be working, okay? You can always do something. And if you don’t want to have any conversations — you don’t want to talk to sidewalk counselors, you don’t want to talk to your friends, you don’t want to write letters to the editor, you don’t want to do postcards, you don’t want to put yourself out there at all, okay. Your money is a conversation too. You can be donating. And if it’s not to us — and it should be to us (laughter) — but if it’s not to us and it’s not the Equal Rights Institute… it doesn’t have to be to us! There’s a million organizations that could use the help. And it doesn’t even have to be money. It could be in-kind donations. There’s all sorts of things. Oh! Do you shop on Amazon? Did you know that Amazon has what’s called Amazon Smile? You could pick a non-profit and they will give a percentage of your purchases to that non-profit at no extra cost to you.

Josh: Actually, we just did the math — we were writing a fundraising email about this — we did the math. So we have, since the year began, brought in roughly thirteen hundred dollars in Amazon Smile gifts.

Monica: That is amazing!

Josh: That literally paid for our new third camera.

Monica: See? And it doesn’t cost you anything extra! You can do Amazon Smile, you can ask your employers if they do match percentages to charities. A lot of times there’s a 501c3. Or you know what you could do? And this is important, people don’t understand this. Instead of thinking, “Well, I don’t even have a hundred dollars to give to these guys.” Can you do five bucks a month? Monthly recurring donors provide money, but they also provide stability and predictability. We literally have donors that give us five or ten dollars a month and they are part of my core team because they have committed over a long term.

Josh: You don’t want to be dependent on one person giving 100 grand or something like that.

Monica: No, although we love it when you do that! That’s wonderful, but there’s…

Josh: You don’t want to only have that.

Monica: You don’t have to have a ton of money to help. We had a college student come to us — do you know how broke I was in college? I was fantasizing about someday being able to buy fresh produce without feeling guilty about it because I was so broke in college. It’s a joke about, you know, just eating Ramen all the time, right? So you know how much it meant to me when we had a college student be like, “I can give you ten dollars a month.” I was like, “Dang, ten dollars! Thank you so much!”

Josh: Well, this is in my head because we were just doing this yesterday. I did that math too. If every single person on our email list just gave ten dollars a month, or 10 more, it would literally triple our budget.

Monica: I know! Exactly! You think it doesn’t make a difference. It makes a difference!

Josh: It would completely change everything at ERI!

Monica: And if you literally don’t have any money and you literally don’t want to talk to anybody, what can you do? You can donate your time. And you can do sidewalk chalk. You can ask people if they need you to transcribe. You know how time-consuming transcription is? We now have a team of transcription volunteers and it has changed my life. It’s changed my life. I’ll be like, “Hey I did this podcast, can somebody transcribe it?” Sure! They get it back to me in a week. Oh my gosh, right? There’s lots of things you can do from home that are helpful. Do you know how to do graphics? It doesn’t have to be gorgeous. But can you literally just take this screen capture tweet and…

Josh: Meet canva.com.

Monica: Just make it in Canva. Yes, exactly. There are so many things you can do and I’m trying to… Oh, oh! Do you like photography? Go to pro-life events…

Josh: Yes!

Monica: This is so important! Go to pro-life events — it could be marches, it could be conferences, it could be tabling, it could be speeches, it could be sidewalk counseling — anything. If you are a good photographer, take high quality photos and then upload them to a royalty-free website. Let people use them in their work. Give them permission off the back…

Josh: And let them know they’re there.

Monica: Send them to the organizations that were involved when you took them. ‘Here are these pictures that you can use to talk about what you’re doing.”

Josh: Like most speaking events that we do, we have no pictures.

Monica: I know because how are you going to take a picture of yourself while you’re talking?

Josh: You can’t.

Monica: He and I have taken pictures of each other at the speeches because nobody else is there to do it.

Josh: Because we both know that you have to take like 30 of a speaker to get one good one because mouths are a super weird thing.

Monica: Or you could just be smarter than we are and take one picture in advance where you’re not talking but pretending to.

Josh: Yes, we have occasionally done that…

Monica: It took me a little too long to figure that out.

Josh: Yes, I mean the difference it would make if there was a volunteer photographer at every single thing that we did.

Monica: Yes. And for the specific organizations it’s a huge difference. But also, when we’re doing blog posts we try to have an image related to every blog post and we have to have royalty-free images or we could take something we took, but maybe it’s not that good. If you’re good, put it on a royalty-free website. Maria Oswalt with Rehumanize International has done this and there’s a couple different uses for this. I’m pretty sure she is on Unsplash as Maria Oswalt and she has taken amazing photos of pro-life events that she has granted anyone to use. And so this is great for us to use but, also, this is a really big deal — tons of people use royalty-free websites. And now when they Google like, fetus, a bunch of pro-life images come up. The first year that she did this her photos had over four million views, just for existing on there when there was basically no pro-life content. So people could look up abortion protest and 90 percent of it will be pro-choice stuff. But now Maria Oswalt’s stuff is up there too. Think about that visibility, okay?

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: There are so many opportunities. And if you are an artist, even not a graphic artist — it doesn’t have to be digital — there is a volunteer, not specific for us, that makes these beautiful paintings on cardboard. She takes an old cardboard box and makes these amazing paintings and then gives them out at walks for people to hold and then somebody else takes pictures of them, and they are very moving. And she just does that of her own accord because that’s her contribution. There’s so many things you can do. And so to bring it all home again, we talk about these legislative defeats. That’s very frustrating, and if you are legislatively minded go that route. Talk to your local and state politicians. Talk to people; get other people to go with you. Go meet them and get to know them. Have a conversation with them. But if that’s not your route, that’s not the end of the story. Secular Pro-Life firmly unequivocally believes that the law is a crucial part of this and we have to change the laws. However, it will never be the only part of this. Hearts and minds are fundamentally important. They’re important to get the laws changed and, even outside the laws, they’re important for helping people right where they’re at. And you can be a part of that conversion. And I know we’ve talked about this before — keep in mind too — when you are trying to move the needle and you’re trying to get more people to see our perspective on this, almost nobody just changes their mind in a single conversation and wham bam they’re done, okay?

Josh: Almost never.

Monica: For most people it will take….

Josh: Months or better…

Monica: …Years, months, or better. We have people, some of our most hardcore passionate activists, that were pro-choice for thirteen years. You don’t know what role you’re playing in moving them and you don’t need to worry about it. I saw this recently and I thought this was such great phrasing. They said: “The way I see it, you’re either planting a seed in their hearts or a needle in their conscience.” But either way you’re just doing a little like, “Hey, hey!” We had somebody reach out. They donated to us. I reached out to them to say thank you for donating. “Why did you donate?” And it turns out they donated because they converted. And they converted because of sidewalk chalk. Not literally, “Oh, sidewalk chalk. I’m converted!” But somebody on their college campus did sidewalk chalk outside of the student cafeteria and it said 67 percent of prenatal Down Syndrome diagnoses end in an abortion. And the person who saw that, the woman who donated to us, she worked with special needs kids and she was like, “That’s made up.” She was pro-choice and she was like, “They just make up anything; it’s ridiculous.” But it bothered her so she went home and looked it up and it’s not made up, it’s true. And then she wasn’t like, “Oh I’m pro-choice.” She was like, “Well, wait a second, what else might I not know?” She started following both pro-choice and pro-life blogs. She started reading more about it and the sidewalk chalk was what started it for her. So you think it doesn’t make any difference. You don’t know.

Josh: I’m glad to know that story because I have probably overly underestimated the value of sidewalk chalk. It’s like, I’m glad to know that story now.

Monica: And a lot of sidewalk chalk is oriented toward outside of clinics and it’ll say we can help you here’s the number. And I’m not saying that’s not important — it is — but you can also just put some of these facts out there. Just, “hey did you know this; hey, did you know that.” You don’t know who you’re reaching.

Josh: Yeah, it’s better than just Pro-Life.

Monica: Pro-life is not nothing but, yeah, you want to put something to give them to chew on. And so then, her conversion story is really great too because it started with the sidewalk chalk. But then as she’s following all these different blogs and she’s learning about a lot of content that she thought wasn’t true that turns out to be true — that was important. But what was also important for her — and people need to understand this — she was also really thrown off as she was following these different online circles with how vitriolic and aggressive and vacuous a lot of the pro-choice voices were and how respectful and substantial the pro-life ones were. And she clarified — and this is important — she’s not saying pro-choice people are all this way, pro-life people are that way. We all know that you have both on both sides. But that’s my point: we do have both on both sides. Make sure you’re one of the good voices, okay?

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: So it’s not just what you’re saying, although you should know what you’re talking about and we would be happy to help you with that. By the way, another plug! Another plug! We have recently unveiled, on Secular Pro-Life, the secularprolife.org index — what we are calling the abortion debate index. It’s literally a table of contents. Right now it has five categories. It has biology, personhood, bodily rights, effects of abortion laws, stereotypes of pro-lifers, and then underneath it has common things pro-choice people say, and then our material telling you what you might want to think about when you’re responding. And we’re going to expand it a lot more. So if you need the content, we got you. But if you need the demeanor, Equal Rights has got you. You need to have both when you’re having these dynamics in these conversations. Always think about — and we’ve talked about this before — we are mostly online. You guys do more in-person stuff and so there will be different rules for different things. Whether you’re online or in-person, always be thinking about yourself as an ambassador for our cause. You are an ambassador. You are representing pro-life people to this person who may not have a ton of exposure or they may have very bad exposure. And so you need to know what you’re talking about. You need to be respectful. You don’t have to be defensive, but you need to be professional or just chill, right? And when you think of yourself as an ambassador you need to think about what you’re spending your time on. I have a lot of theories about this online — it might be different in person — but whoever you’re talking to online, where everything is public, remember who’s reading it, because — there’s no hard numbers on this — but depending on the forum and depending on the situation, you could have anywhere from 10 to 500 people silently reading your conversation with this person. And they’re thinking about not just what you are saying but, are you the jerk or is the other person the jerk.

Josh: I would argue this is most of the reason to do any online debates is for the other people watching.

Monica: It actually is. I’m not saying that you will never change the mind of the person you’re directly talking to. It has happened. But that’s actually why, by the way, for the most part, I will not engage in debates privately. I will not, online. It’s a waste of my time. No offense. We actually had someone message the page not that long ago and he was perfectly polite. There was nothing wrong with his demeanor.

Josh: But you’re leading a pro-life group.

Monica: Yes, sure.

Josh: Like most of the volunteers, the people who are not like, if they could…

Monica: And it all depends on your relationship though. If it’s an online stranger — wasted time. If it’s someone you know in person that’s talking to you online — probably very good use of your time. So there’s a lot of factors here. But we had this guy message us, totally polite, asking questions I’ve answered 50 million times before. And I did answer them initially because initially it was easy — just like, “Oh here is my answer to that.” And then he wants more details or whatever and I am always overwhelmed with how much I have to do for Secular Pro-Life. I love my job but there’s always way more to do than I can get done and I’m very conscientious about what I’m doing with my time. And I’m not trying to brush anyone off, but you want me to sit for an hour and talk to you and only you about this thing that a million people have said before. And I’m just not going to.

Josh: That’s a lot. And I am failing to give a lot of people what they want because they’re wanting these answers. And they get really mad at me when I don’t….

Monica: Well, they could also just, like, go find it. I’m not saying anything I haven’t written before. Oh, I didn’t even say that I just stopped. It’s on Facebook Messenger. I was just like I’m not even responding to this anymore. I don’t even care. It’s all on our website; it’s all over the place.

Josh: But there is something about that also that’s going to be true of even some of the people who aren’t professionally doing this all the time. They have a life; they have different levels of availability and it’s okay to draw boundaries.

Monica: Other important boundaries for online conversations — we posted about this after Dobbs when everyone was fighting online more than they usually are. And a lot of people who don’t normally fight about it were fighting about it and a lot of people who don’t normally fight online were fighting online. And we said a couple things to keep in mind: first of all, you don’t have to answer every single question and accusation they have. You can pick one and say, “This is what I will talk about first.” And you could just say that. And if they’re like, “Oh you don’t want to answer these questions…” “You’re right, I don’t because I am a finite human being. So which one do you want me to answer?” You also don’t have to answer them within five seconds. We’ve all seen that thing where you’re arguing with someone and if you don’t get back to them within like 30 minutes, “Oh, no response, huh?! I literally was sitting here waiting for you to answer me because you have such great insight and new information for me and I was just wondering what it would be!” It’s just ridiculous. I literally don’t even… I ignore that they said that completely. Another thing you can do in online debates if you have the fortitude — take everything they said, minus out all of the vitriol and trolling. What is the point? And just only address that; try not to match their snark. Try not to answer every single thing. Just get to the point. And I’m not saying I always do this effectively at all. I am not saying that, I’m just saying you ought to. So you don’t have to answer every single thing they say and you don’t have to answer constantly. In fact, one of my friends, when Dobbs was happening, couldn’t resist. And they were just answering too many things. It wasn’t even that they got invited to. They saw their friend’s status — they weren’t even on it — and they had to. So they went to the other person’s table and started talking and they did it for like six different people. So their solution was they literally set themselves a 24-hour reminder and then every 24 hours they go back and see what was said and answer. And it keeps it from getting too crazy; it keeps it from taking over too much of your life. And plus, if you set that cadence they expect it, as opposed to if you were answering, answering then you disappeared. So again, lots of ways you could do it. But have healthy boundaries. You don’t actually owe anybody all of your time and energy. One thing I’m a big fan of and not everyone agrees with this. I do this all the time — the hit and run comment — all the time. Not everyone agrees with this because they’re like, “Well then they have a response and you never respond. It looks like you didn’t have a response.” Maybe, maybe not. I have more to do than I can possibly get done and if I don’t say anything and literally nobody says anything — I consider it the 80/20 rule, 20 of the effort for 80. And so I will do it when it’s something substantial. So especially on public threads, not necessarily with a Facebook friend where only friends can see it. But on public threads, I will often pick one thing and be like, “That’s actually not true. If you’re interested, here’s some information.” And then I’ll never even look back. I’ll immediately mute the thread and forget about it. I won’t be able to find it again because I do it so often. I have no idea where I put all these nuggets but I think it’s better than doing nothing because at least you put it out there. You don’t know how many people are going to click on the link. You don’t know how many people are going to consider it. And if you do go back — and I don’t recommend it — if you really don’t want to get too involved, don’t go back. Don’t look at it again. It doesn’t matter, but if you do go back there could be, depending on the thread, eight different people responding to you with different arguments and name calling and stuff and you never responded. Okay, you never responded. Anybody who is silently reading this and thinking about it at all should be able to recognize that you might not respond to literally every single thing. And a lot of people refuse to engage entirely because they know they’re going to get dogpiled and they feel overwhelmed and then they don’t want to go through that, and I don’t blame you. But then if we all refuse to engage entirely, only one side is talking and that is not going to work, especially because they’re wrong.

Josh: Okay, so we’ve talked about a lot of things that people can be doing. The first thing that I thought of when you sent me a possible podcast called What Should the Pro-life Movement Be Doing Right Now. What’s been in my head – what should we be doing post Roe is like the only thing that I can think about since we heard the oral arguments in Dobbs. Oh my gosh, this is going to happen now and this is not what I thought was ever going to happen.

Monica: We’re like the dog that caught the car.

Josh: I have completely agreed with this analogy. The pro-life movement is like the dog that caught the car for the first time and is now trying to figure out what now? There is some truth to that because most of us didn’t think that this could happen.

Monica: Right.

Josh: And a lot of the stuff that we can do now couldn’t have been done before. So there is…

Monica: …kind of experimental some of it…

Josh: I’ve heard leaders talk about it like Pro-Life 3.0. We need to drop a lot of the assumptions…

Monica: As the post-Roe generation….

Josh: We are now the post-Roe generation, yeah! So I’m thinking a lot, not just about what we should be doing but, of what we should not be doing? I think of this as a really fragile moment….

Monica: It definitely could go a lot better or worse.

Josh: …at a societal level. I don’t want the Prohibition thing to happen…

Monica: Right.

Josh: …and for, you know, some kind of federal codifying Roe amendment or something…

Monica: Oh, gosh, no.

Josh: Hopefully that doesn’t happen. I mean, in the end the timing is the timing. They made it a Supreme Court issue and then the Supreme Court test has been going on for 45 years.

Monica: Now it might be this other new different thing.

Josh: Now this is where we’re at. But trying to think of, how can we not do a ton of damage right now.

Monica: How do we not screw this up?

Josh: So I’ve got like four unforced errors for us to avoid that I’ve been talking about lately. I did this in this piece.

Monica: Clarify unforced errors versus forced errors.

Josh: So, like in tennis, an unforced error would be like if you screw up your serve really badly. Or if you just completely screw up on your own…

Monica: And there was no reason that had to happen…

Josh: It’s not because they had a really good shot at you and then you missed it. It’s you did not have to mess that up and you did mess that up and it’s the worst kind of mess up. And I almost never use sports metaphors because I’m not a sports guy but for whatever reason…

Monica: Okay, it makes sense.

Josh: I’m interested in your reaction because I don’t think you’ve heard at least all four of these. It depends on how much you’ve been able to pay attention to us lately.

Monica: Was it on TikTok? I might have seen it.

Josh: Possibly. Probably.

Monica: Emily is pretty amazing on TikTok.

Josh: So the first one: we need to be really careful about including clear life of the mother exceptions in abortion bans.

Monica: Yes.

Josh: Like the states that are able to pass the really big substantive protections on the unborn they need…

Monica: And do you think they are not?

Josh: I think usually by the end of the process they do.

Monica: Right.

Josh: From what I can tell that there have been a couple of times that bills have been initially proposed without it.

Monica: VERY unforced error. Super unforced.

Josh: But the fact that it ever happened is really, really bad. And look. I’m glad that there are apparently at least a few politicians who are actually pro-life enough to do something about it and are trying. And I’m kind of just assuming they’re doing their best and they are accidentally screwing something up. But it’s screwing it up at a national level. And people know, I am a very charitable guy when it comes to pro-choice people but I do firmly believe, at this point I’ve seen enough evidence, that there are pro-choice doctors on TikTok that are intentionally knowingly lying about this stuff.

Monica: Can I give an example just to hit on that a little bit more. Okay, not all the laws are written with the same language, some are more clear than others. Not denying that. But Texas was the test case with the Heartbeat Law and what they did, and you can look up this language yourself, they defined abortion as, “legally, an abortion is defined as…. blah blah blah,” whatever they said. And they said, “what is not legally an abortion are the following…” and they listed a couple different things. One of the things they said is “any treatment of ectopic pregnancy.” Now I wanna explain this for a second because what you will hear is people will say “Oh yeah, they said you could treat ectopic pregnancy if her life is in danger, because they said they defined abortion as this and this and this, but there’s an exception if her life is in danger. But then you have to wait to make sure her life is sufficiently in danger.” No! They said any treatment of ectopic pregnancy is not an abortion. So the life exception to abortion doesn’t even matter because any treatment of ectopic pregnancy is not an abortion. And it did not say “if you are doing this particular procedure, or this particular medication, in these particular circumstances” or make it super confusing. They just literally said, “if it’s treating ectopic pregnancy, it’s not an abortion.” You could not possibly be clearer. It’s not, as far as I can see, possible to be clearer.

Josh: This is definitely a common language thing in some of the state bills.

Monica: Not all of them — and I’m not saying it’s all of them — but I’m saying then you hear these stories out of Texas and some of them have been “Oh, what if you can’t get treatment for ectopic pregnancy?” What are you talking about? They couldn’t possibly be clearer that this is not meant to touch that at all. Sometimes they go even worse than that. They don’t even just say, you can’t get treatment. They’re saying they want women to not get treatment. What are you talking about?

Josh: So I will get to that. I think there is a reason why they’re saying that or at least sometimes the reason that it’s not…

Monica: Again emphasizing this is not every bill, but one more point I want to make — to the extent that we aren’t being clear enough in our language, whether it’s life of the mother exception or other kinds of exceptions like miscarriage management, we need to be. And one of the things that we need to have is pro-life medical professionals interfacing with legislatures to help them craft the correct language. It’s not just to give them the right information; it’s also to give them confidence that they are doing this correctly. There are some non-zero number of ostensibly pro-life legislators who would be interested in this but they don’t want to touch it because they’re afraid they’re going to screw it up. And if they have the right people — so AAPLOG, the pro-life OB/Gyns, are asking more and more people, especially if you’re in the correct state for it, to get in touch with them. They are trying to be involved with legislators at every level to give them advice, to give them input. You don’t even have to formally sign anything. You don’t have to go public or anything. You just need to be there and can literally call up their office and be like, “Here’s who I am. Here’s what I know. If you’re ever thinking about this, please keep in mind I’d be happy to give you input.” By the way, they also do witness training. So if you want to be more public about it, they really, really could use the help of pro-life medical professionals to give expert witness during legislative sessions about what would and would not be likely in a medical setting? If all you have is abortion providers — I’m not just talking about pro-choice activists; I’m talking about literally just abortion providers — giving input on this stuff, you already know which way it’s going to go. That’s my rant, go ahead.

Josh: You kind of bring me to another kind of thing that I was going to say and it’s something that we talked about in a podcast recently. I basically think that most pro-life people define the word abortion in a way that is unhelpful for clear communication. I think there’s an equivocation between pro-life and pro-choice people and the word abortion. I don’t think it really mattered too much before Dobbs.

Monica: I think Dobbs made it very clear that people are using it to mean all kinds of different things.

Josh: Yeah. And so pro-life people typically, I think, want to use it to mean an intentional, elective, you’re trying to kill a baby procedure. And they want to be able to then be able to say, “I am a 100 percent, no exceptions” pro-lifer. So here’s the problem though: we are the only ones that use the word that way. Pro-choice people — I mean doctors use it way more broadly sometimes depending on the doctor, depending on the group …

Monica: Spontaneous abortion or incomplete abortion or all kinds of things…

Josh: Yeah, all these different things. And then generally you just get, “What do normal people think of the word abortion?” And since most people would use the word abortion more broadly than a pro-lifer, the equivocation they have is miscommunication that happens. That at least I’m concerned about, is when pro-choice people hear from lying pro-choice doctors on TikTok that we’re trying to kill women who have ectopic pregnancies and then that person hears their pro-life friends say, “I am a no exceptions pro-lifer; I am against 100 percent abortions,” then what they hear is something different than what the pro-life guy….

Monica: TikTok doc is right…

Josh: …they are hearing us say, “We think women should have to commit suicide via pregnancy.”

Monica: Yep. Side note! Let’s say that it was true that we are evil and we hate women. Let’s say that that was true. okay? And all we care about is fetuses because we worship and obsess over fetuses. Let’s say that was true. The fetus will still die. Why would we, even in that ridiculous description of ourselves, want both the woman and the fetus to die?

Josh: So I basically think — and I know off-air you’ve got like a really cool thing to add to this — minimally speaking for pro-lifers, when they describe their view, if they’re going to get their elevator pitch moment, they need to make sure that they are making a clear life of the mother exception. And I think that they ought to define it. I think basically say elective abortion.

Monica: I have two points for this…

Josh: Or be very over the top specific about what they mean when they say, what are you against and what you are for? If you are okay with people intervening, which almost all pro-lifers are in an ectopic pregnancy, they need to understand that.

Monica: Yes, exactly. So actually, several points. First point, Secular Pro-Life, generally speaking, when people say “Do you make any exceptions about abortion?” one of the first things I say is “If her life is in danger and the only solution is abortion we think she should be able to get that.” Now that’s me glossing over a lot of nuance and the way we define abortion, and is treatment of ectopic pregnancy abortion, and all these other things. But that doesn’t matter; I’m just getting to the heart of the point. Nobody thinks that a woman should have to die because we are against abortion. That’s the first thing, okay? I just go straight to it and for a lot of people that question is sincere. Now there’s a lot of activists where they’re trying to trip you up, but for a lot of everyday people, that’s a sincere question. Secondly, a lot of times instead of saying elective abortion — because remember we talk about this constantly but our target audience is people who don’t talk about this constantly and they might even have a really clear idea what you mean by that — so often what I will say is, “What do you think of the 95 percent plus of abortions in this country where the abortion is of a healthy fetus carried by a healthy woman with no medical emergency?”

Josh: I love…I think that’s so good for people…

Monica: That’s what I say. I can’t be clearer. I guess technically you could just say “where it involves no medical emergency…” But just to really emphasize the point we’re not talking about any fetal disability, we’re not talking about any issue. It has nothing to do with physical, medical health. What do you think about that?

Josh: I think every, single time a pro-life person gives their elevator pitch on why they are pro-life, they need to say that.

Monica: Yes, because I think — this is just speculation based on the playbook the other side is using and based on the way things are going — I suspect that the average American who’s not that into this thinks that like half of abortions are medical emergencies, or some ridiculous proportion, some insane amount of times.

Josh: Or at least a lot, 20, 25% or something like that.

Monica: Right, when it’s actually almost never the case. And that’s not even getting into the fact that we are trying and, I think, sometimes succeeding, sometimes not, to craft laws that make exceptions for that anyway. So that is the second thing. But the third thing I want to emphasize — this is super important — we want to make a delineation between elective abortion and medically necessary abortion for the reasons you just explained because people think of those differently. And I’ve said this before: polls show that Americans broadly support medically necessary abortion and, much less so, non-medically necessary abortion. It’s totally different, okay? So we have every reason to make the delineation. The other side has every reason not to make that delineation. And they are trying not to on purpose. This isn’t me being paranoid. ACOG just released a language guide a couple months ago — they had thirteen phrases that they want us to stop saying. They claimed it was all for medical accuracy. One of them did have a medically related reason.

Josh: One out of eight?

Monica: One out of thirteen.

Josh: Out of thirteen!? Oh, okay! Wow!

Monica: The rest of them were basically just ACOG saying, “We don’t want you to think badly about abortion.” And one of the thirteen phrases they said we shouldn’t use ever again is elective abortion.

Josh: What!?

Monica: They don’t want you to say elective abortion because they don’t think it’s up to third parties to judge whether her reason is good enough or not.

Josh: That has nothing to do with medicine.

Monica: No, it has nothing to do with medicine. Elective is definitely a term used in the medical field. Forget the abortion debate, forget the abortion debate! Elective versus emergent, elective versus therapeutic.

Josh: Kinda like a C-section!

Monica: It’s also used in billing for insurance. In fact, we just covered, recently, the death of Keisha Atkins. She sought a six-month abortion in New Mexico and they fraudulently signed paperwork saying it was for all these medically necessary reasons. And you ask, “Why would they do that? New Mexico has no gestational limits on abortion. They don’t even have to say it’s medically necessary. They can do it for any reason. So why would they lie?” So they could bill Medicaid because Medicaid won’t cover it unless it’s for medically necessary reasons. So the medical side is not confused about if there’s a difference between elective or not. They just don’t want us talking about it. ACOG doesn’t want us talking about it. Why do you think that is?

Josh: They don’t want us judging.

Monica: They don’t want us judging and they don’t want us conveying to Americans what proportion of abortions are not for medically necessary reasons. It’s not a coincidence that when you talk to pro-choice activists, for the most part, they will go right to, “This woman was trying to get treatment for miscarriage and she almost died” and “This woman was trying to get treatment for an ectopic pregnancy and she almost died.” And don’t get me wrong, we do have to address that. We have to address those situations and make sure we are not putting people in danger. I’m not saying we shouldn’t. But they would rather talk about anything than elective abortion. They would rather talk about miscarriage; they would rather talk about ectopic pregnancy. They’d rather talk about gay marriage; they’d rather talk about contraception. They’d rather talk about anything, anything other than elective abortion. And do you know why? Because Americans don’t LIKE elective abortion. In fact, I just read a study that came out recently where they had a pro-choice audience, including a couple of abortion providers, and other people who like volunteered to do pro-choice activism — so not even just nominally pro-choice people but a very pro-choice audience, watch the documentary After Tiller, which puts as much of a sympathetic spin on late-term abortion as you possibly could. You shouldn’t even call it a documentary — that’s a different rant. So they had an already agreeable audience watch a very positive documentary on late-term abortion and then they interviewed them afterwards about their impressions. And they did find that, after watching it, they were more sympathetic about late-term abortion than they had been before. They did find that. And, even then, they still were only okay with it if it was medically necessary, basically. They still were saying things like, “Yes, I see why this might be necessary for these dire situations. I see why, given the right reasons…” They were having these caveats. And the people doing the research who are striding abortion rights activists, were contextualizing the research saying, “We still have work to do because they got better. But they still think there should be limits.”

Josh: “We have this problem….”

Monica: Yes, they’re still judging based on the reasons, when we’re trying to say that it’s their autonomy and whatever. They don’t want us to talk about elective abortion. So for the pro-life people who are feeling like it should be obvious what abortion means — I’m not even going to argue with you about that or not — I’m saying there is every reason strategically for us to emphasize that we are talking about elective abortion because, first of all we are. And, secondly, the average American who’s not super into this debate, they feel very differently about elective abortion than medically necessary abortion and they feel differently about us based on if they think we’re talking about one or the other. So there are a bunch of reasons that we have incentive to make this delineation. And if you need proof, all you have to do is look at ACOG asking us not to make this delineation.

Josh: You have an article or something about that?

Monica: Yes! I do have an article about this! It is called… what is it called?

Josh: I’ll link to it in the description. It’s OK. (laughter)

Monica: And, by the way, this article took me forever to write, and I told you I’m very conscientious about my time and there was a part of me that was like, “Why am I doing this? I shouldn’t be spending this much time on this.” But I was so mad.

Josh: This is interesting.

Monica: It is called ACOG Has Spoken: 13 Phrases We No Longer Are Supposed to Use Regarding Abortion. And there was ONE phrase that they gave a medical justification for — that was late-term abortion versus later abortion. Now, personally, I don’t feel strongly about this. I will say either one. I’ve started saying later abortion more often. Actually, what I usually do…

Josh: What’s the reasoning?

Monica: I will tell you in a second, but what I usually do is I don’t even use either one of those; they’re both vague. I just say 21 weeks or later or third trimester.

Josh: Even better. Clarity!

Monica: Yes, but the reason they are giving is that, in terms of pregnancy when you talk about term, you’re talking about when you “get to term” you’re getting to where you’re supposed to be having the baby. And so you know, in that regard, “term” would be 40 weeks or 38 to 42 weeks or whatever. So “late-term” would be after 40 weeks and they are accusing us of trying to say that these abortions are happening after birth. That’s not what we’re saying. You could show a strong history of us and the other side using late-term abortion to broadly mean 21 weeks or later, post viability, that kind of thing.

Josh: And, to be fair, they always fight the born-alive kind of legislation too.

Monica: Yes, also that. And I am saying the internet is forever and we have the receipts of Planned Parenthood, NARAL — even now there are still journalists who will say late-term abortion and they’re pro-choice journalists. But now they’re saying, “You guys made that up to confuse and prejudice people against us.” And I’m like, “Okay, what do you want me to say so I can make my point? I don’t even care.” So that was the only one where they were like, “medically, ‘term’ means this so ‘late-term’ means that. So you’re a big meanie and you should say later abortion instead.” So, fine. I’ve started saying later abortion more often in my stuff, depending on the context. The other twelve phrases they said — you know, I will tell you what they said. These are what they don’t want you to say, are you ready: chemical abortion, surgical abortion, heartbeat bill, fetal heartbeat, dismemberment ban, abortion provider, baby or unborn child (that’s an old one), self-induced abortion, elective abortion, partial-birth abortion, womb, or abortion on demand. So let me re-emphasize really quick, they don’t want you to say chemical abortion, surgical abortion, self-induced abortion, elective abortion, or partial-birth abortion because basically — and you can read the details here — I went to great detail on every single one with lots of sources including the up-to-date database and all sorts all the details you could possibly want. What it comes down to is they don’t want people to have details on abortion.

Josh: Right.

Monica: They just want them to accept it as health care, period.

Josh: The more people are thinking about what it is….

Monica: Yes. They don’t want you to think about hearts and heartbeats, for sure. They didn’t mention this specifically here — they don’t want you to think about fetal pain. They don’t want you to think about the different kinds of abortion and the different reasons women get them. And, by the way, let’s say that you are fine morally with abortion. Let’s say that you are, okay?. This is still absurd because you should care! You should care….

Josh: How do you feel about the fact that your side is clearly trying to clean up the language….

Monica: Like “La, la, la, la!” (putting fingers in ears to block hearing). Not even just that! Not even how much you want to obfuscate everything. But let’s say you’re a moderate pro-choice person. You don’t think abortion is morally wrong, per se. Maybe later, but definitely not earlier. And you sympathize with the reasons women want to get one. You should still care why women are getting them, because there’s some non-zero percentage of women who are getting them because they feel like they don’t have a choice. And we can’t possibly talk about that or examine what’s going on with the party, or the side, that’s like, “Uh, we don’t need to give the CDC data about abortion. We don’t need to offer women the OPTION to view the ultrasound. We don’t need to be reading fetal development info. We don’t need to be asking them why they’re getting it.” Every time we try to do just a data collection thing, not a restriction, but just … we just did this in Colorado recently, where they proposed a bill that said Colorado has no limits on abortion gestational limits, none. It’s not like after 24 weeks you have to have a broad health exception; it’s just there’s not a gestational limit. So, in Colorado, we would like to gather data on who is getting abortions, at what gestational ages. And when I say who I don’t mean people’s names. I mean the number of women getting them at different gestational ages, and then give them, whatever 5/10/15 options as to why and have them say why they’re doing it. And you could see as it gets later, why they’re doing it. People are always like, “Oh, where’s the data to show why elective late-term abortion is happening?” First of all, there is data, but it’s very hard to find. And you know why it’s hard to find? Not because of us. We are not against gathering that data. Someone is against gathering that data. It’s not us. And you should care, if you’re a moderate pro-choice person, why a woman would want to get an abortion at 28 weeks. That should be concerning. Maybe it is because she really, really, really doesn’t want this pregnancy for various reasons. Maybe it is. Maybe it’s not. Do you care if it’s not? Do you care if she’s going to get a 28-week abortion which she really doesn’t want to get? Do you want to find out why and address those issues or are you afraid if we talk about that, it undermines the right to abortion generally? So throw her under the bus because ABORTION RIGHTS ABOVE ALL! I think we all know the answer already. So when they try to control the language, the language controls the way the conversation goes. So I agree with you, that we should be very intentional. The unforced error of being confused about what we mean by abortion — and they want us to be confusing about that. They want us to be vague and confusing about that.

Josh: So don’t play into their hands

Monica: Yeah… so that they could be like, “You don’t care if a woman dies from an ectopic pregnancy.” And you’re over here like, “Can we just not dismember 15-week fetuses for no medical reason? Can we not?”

Josh: Right.

Monica: They don’t want to talk about that.

Josh: All right, so I’ve only got one more on here. We’re again past the hour now.

Monica: Of course we are.

Josh: So to recap, we need to be very careful about including clear life and other exceptions in the actual bills…

Monica: Yes.

Josh: Which means that maybe pro-lifers are using the word abortion sometimes in a way that you don’t like. But if that’s the clearest way to do the legislation, if that is the way that makes the hardest or the pro-choice doctors on TikTok say, “There’s this killing effect and now I can’t save people’s lives.”

Monica: To be clear, they will say it either way. But it’s harder for them to be persuasive.

Josh: Make it as hard as possible.

Monica: Make it seem RIDICULOUS for them to say that.

Josh: Exactly. Okay so we got that. Also, every time the pro-lifer describes their view they need to include a clear life for the mother exception kind of a statement in it.

Monica: Say: “For no medical reason, for no medical reason.”

Josh: And the way that you did it is the best way. Repeat the line.

Monica: “What do you think about abortions on healthy fetuses, carried by healthy women, for no medical reason?”

Josh: That’s the line. Memorize it. Add it to your pro-life pitch. Will you be more careful about how we define abortion? And then, lastly, we need to understand why we shouldn’t prosecute women for illegal abortion.

Monica: You want to get that done in less than an hour?

Josh: Yeah, I mean, I’ll point to an article — we explain, basically, why our view is this. We are trying to basically add nuance to both sides of this debate because I think, generally speaking, almost everyone who talks about this is lacking too much nuance on one side of a spectrum. And we’re trying to like, “Here’s a more nuanced middle option.”

Monica: But also, take hope here — talking again about that bell curve of activism — I think a lot of times when we get into nuanced discussions about this, we are dealing with the tails. Similar to when you’re dealing with the average American and they’re saying, “Do you think there should be a life of the mother exception?” and they’re sincere. And you’re like, “Yes I do.” Similarly, if they say, “Do you want to prosecute women?” a lot of them are sincere. They’re not trying to get a “gotcha” — if you say no you don’t really care and if you say yes you’re evil. They really — “Do you want to prosecute women?” “No.” “Okay, let’s talk then.”

Josh: Right. But the problem is now, for whatever reasons, that there are more and more loud voices that are on the pro-prosecution side.

Monica: Well, because Roe is gone. So now that’s an actual thing that you could even conceivably talk about. Before Roe, it was assuming a frictionless-surface-Coffee-House conversation. Now it’s like a thing that could theoretically happen.

Josh: But the other side is the one that wants us all focusing on what exactly should we do if abortion becomes illegal? What should we do to this woman? They want that.

Monica: I read another piece of research recently where they interviewed a whole bunch of average American pro-life people — so again non-activists. “Do you think there should be a penalty and what should it be?” And what they actually found was that most of them [wanted things] not related to jail. It was like maybe a fine or community service or a class. They thought there should be something; they weren’t sure what it was. And they concluded from that, not that “Oh, they definitely don’t want to prosecute women,” but that, “These guys just don’t know what they think about things.” I mean you’re not totally wrong, that you could pick an average pro-life person and they won’t have every answer to every single thing. But you refuse to see that it’s because they’re not motivated by hating women. You refuse to see that. If it really was that they just hated women, why wouldn’t they just be like, “Yep, jail. Done.”

Josh: Why would most pro-lifers have actually spent a ton of time trying to figure out exactly what should happen in the situation when they haven’t thought it’s remotely possible in their entire lifetime. It’s not that weird that this is one that a lot of pro-lifers haven’t thought about.

Monica: It’s another one of those asymmetric things where we suffer from scrutinizing our view. And you should scrutinize our view. But there’s nobody scrutinizing the other side. And so then people who are only listening to one set of information and are like, “Oh, well they don’t know what they think. They don’t know what they want to do and they have these bad answers.” But nobody’s asking you about — and I will say it again — about late-term elective abortion. Every time you want to ask me about the implications of conception bans, IVF, contraception, all of those things, that’s fine. You’re not wrong to ask me. But if you ask me that and you’re not asking anybody about six month/seven month [abortion], for no medical reason, then I don’t take you seriously. And the thing is you are talking about theoretically. You’re talking about “What if in the future we ban IVF clinics?” I’m talking about, literally, right now, every day, for years this has already been happening. And you’re like, “What if your implications are really terrible in the future?” Okay, what if your implications are really terrible right now while we’re talking?

Josh: What if you were dismembering six month fetuses and no one really knows about it?

Monica: Like, yeah what if that was happening?

Josh: Yeah, what IF!?

Monica: Just hypothetically — if they could live outside the womb and you decided to inject a poison into their heart first to make sure that didn’t happen, hypothetically, and then birth them. Like, how would you feel about that? And I could tell you 95 percent of the time the answer is: “That doesn’t happen.”

Josh: Yeah, and whenever that happens, I point them to your website.

Monica: Let’s say it doesn’t happen. Can you answer the question? Because nobody’s banned an IVF clinic yet either. And I’m still not like, “Nobody’s banning that, so I’m not going to answer you.” Well, actually, some people are like that to be fair…

Josh: What’s the question for me?

Monica: I’m saying, when you’re having conversations where you want your opposition to defend or at least examine the hard edges of their case, I’m fine with that if we’re doing it in both directions.

Josh: Yes.

Monica: So when someone wants me to answer, “Oh do you think we should shut down IVF clinics?” Do you want me to just be like, “Well we haven’t.” “Okay, do you think we should?” “Okay, but we haven’t.”

Josh: Of course we have to answer the question.

Monica: Right, just answer the question. But then I’m like, “Okay, what about elective late-term abortion?” “Oh, nobody does that.” “Okay, but would you have a problem with it?” “Nobody does that.” “Okay, you would have a problem, wouldn’t you?” It’s okay to say that. We have common ground here. This is where we both agree that this is a freaking terrible, horrible thing.

Josh: Do you think that this whole list of abortion doctors, and people who’ve had the abortions are lying when they say it happened.

Monica: No, no, they don’t think I think they’re lying. They think I’m dumb; I’m misunderstanding them.

Josh: How can you misunderstand?

Monica: Because Josh, abortion just means ending a pregnancy….

Josh: Am I asking too many big questions right now (sarcasm)

Monica: Abortion just means ending a pregnancy; it doesn’t mean that anybody has to die. That’s just an anti-abortion myth. We are just vilifying abortion to say that it is about purposely killing anyone. So when the DuPont clinic in Washington DC has a section on their website that says 26 plus week abortions, no medical reason, we don’t care what the reason is, whatever you want. And I point them to that. They’re like, “Yeah, because that’s just labor induction and the NICU.” That’s what they think. They think that I don’t understand the clinic correctly because when they say abortion they just mean early termination of pregnancy.

Josh: I’ll just say again and I’ve said this before. If they’re going to reject your view or your argument, you want it to be for the dumbest, most intellectually dishonest reason ever. You don’t want it to be because you’ve been a jerk or too weird or because you made a logical fallacy or you made some bad argument or something like that. You want it to be that they are being flagrantly intellectually dishonest, because it is going to be more likely that they can’t sustain that for their entire life.

Monica: Getting back to what we were speaking about before, if this is happening online, don’t feel like you have to get them to admit what you’re saying, you totally don’t. You could say, “Look at the DuPont clinic.” And they’ll be like, “Oh, they just mean labor induction to NICU.” And you’re like, “Okay.”

Josh: Almost no one is willing to admit they’re wrong in public.

Monica: What I’m saying is you don’t have to keep going; you can stop. Because, if your target audience is the average reasonably intellectually honest person and they see that response, they’re gonna be like, “That seems implausible” and you don’t have to do anything else. Okay, we’ve gotten on a tangent.

Josh: Okay, we need to stop. We’ve covered it; we’ve got many more episodes to film and so we’re gonna bring this one to a close. I’m so glad that you’re here. Thanks for being here and I can’t wait for the next one.

Monica: Yes, thanks for letting me just rant and rant.

Josh: My favorite thing!

Related links:
Check out Secular Pro-Life’s collaborative website

Check out Secular Pro-Life’s “The Abortion Debate Index”

ERI deep dive podcast on the Dobbs oral arguments

The post What Should the Pro-Life Movement Do Now? (with Secular Pro-Life’s Monica Snyder) – Part 2 appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 57:04

Recorded in late 2022, Monica Snyder from Secular Pro-Life joined Josh to film a few episodes on what the pro-life movement should be doing right now. It took us a while to get back to regular podcast editing due to a TON of travel, but everything they said is still relevant.

The discussion includes:
– The five state amendments the pro-life movement lost in the midterms, and why we lost them.
– Does the CA amendment actually mean that infanticide is being legalized?
– Where is the American public on abortion? What do we know?
– The difference between how Josh and Monica reacted to the Dobbs decision.

Learn more about Secular Pro-Life (and follow them on social media) here:
https://secularprolife.org

Editor’s note: There’s a little electrical hum noise in one of the microphones that we didn’t catch that day because we haven’t had that issue before and decided to record without headphones. Oops! Won’t make that mistake again. We’ve minimized it as much as possible, but there’s no way to totally take it out. Sorry about that.

Transcript:

Thank you to Secular Pro-Life and their volunteers for providing this transcript.

Announcer Voice: If you’re looking for clear pro-life thinking, cutting edge apologetics, and a fresh approach to abortion dialogue, you’ve come to the right place. This is the Equipped for Life Podcast.

Josh: Welcome back to the Equipped for Life Podcast. We have one of my favorite pro-life people in the world finally in my studio. It is my friend, my good friend Monica Snyder from Secular Pro-Life. It is so good to have you here, we have so many episodes that we want to record in the next few days. So all of the social media people who are all excited that we’re doing crossover stuff…

Monica: We have a lot of shared followers, I think.

Josh: We have a lot of people excited and I’m really happy for that.

Monica: Very nice people. Yes.

Josh: And I am just really happy that we’re going to be talking about a lot of different things that I think a lot of people are excited to hear us talk about. There might be some stream of consciousness here, it’s not like these are super super prepped outlines, we don’t want them to be. But kind of intentionally, we know that sometimes we even disagree a little bit, and think differently. And so people are going to get, kind of, multiple perspectives.

Monica: Yeah.

Josh: It’ll be just really interesting to see where we overlap on the Venn diagram and the little areas where we maybe don’t, and that’s totally okay. That’s the pro-life movement. So for those who don’t know, somehow, what Secular Pro-Life does, I want you to briefly describe it.

Monica: Sure.

Josh: I kind of always say this, Secular Pro-Life is maybe the most important pro-life organization in the world.

Monica: Thank you.

Josh: I really believe that, I think I said it in about every speech I’ve given in a couple of years.

Monica: Thank you!

Josh: And so, I really care about it. I think our people know a lot about you guys, but just in case, give them the Secular Pro-life elevator pitch.

Monica: Sure. So I’m the executive director of Secular Pro-Life. I am an atheist. It is an atheist-led organization, although you do not have to be atheist to participate, but it is atheist-led. And we have a three-part mission. The first part is to advance secular arguments against abortion. The second part is to make space for atheists or agnostics, or humanists, or even just people who aren’t particularly religious who want to do anti-abortion work. And the third part is to build interfaith coalitions of people who want to advance secular arguments against abortion.

Josh: Like we’re doing right now.

Monica: Like we’re doing right now! So we like to say, you know, we don’t actually really care what you personally believe about religion or faith or whatever, we care if you are with us on this issue. And we want to be very intentional about this. Our goal is to advance arguments against abortion, not arguments against religion. We’re not trying to make more atheists, we’re trying to make more pro-lifers.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: We do really love it when we find more pro-life atheists, because it’s a solidarity thing.

Josh: Yes!

Monica: But that’s not the main point. And so we have been, I think for about years now, putting out secular pro-life content. It’s starting to really ramp up since I went full-time as executive director, which has been fantastic, honestly. And we want to talk about some of that stuff, maybe in some of these episodes.

Josh: Awesome. Okay, so today (or for the next maybe a couple of episodes, we’ll see how this goes) we’re going to be talking about what should the pro-life movement be doing right now. We’re recording this November 18th. So I don’t know exactly when this is going out. Actually, for sure it’s going out next year because we kind of figured out we are not putting out any more podcasts this year because we can’t, because of the all the stuff for stuff that we’re trying to get done.

Monica: Scheduling, sure.

Josh: So this will come out in a couple of months or something like that. And we just recently had the midterms.

Monica: A week and a half ago, a week and a half ago we had the midterms.

Josh: It didn’t go super well for pro-lifers.

Monica: Not super well, no.

Josh: And so a lot of people are kind of talking about that, and you were interested in talking a little bit, a bit about that.

Monica: Yes.

Josh: Because basically pro-life lost on every single amendment that it could have lost on.

Monica: Yes, even ones that we didn’t feel particularly concerned about, so.

Josh: So what’s going on with that?

Monica: So for a quick recap, there were five amendments. Some of them were to advance pro-choice legislation, some of them were to protect pro-life ideas, and we lost all of them. That was in California, Kentucky, Vermont, Montana, and especially Michigan. And so this was a week and a half ago, and we’ve had a lot of people reach out to us since then, kind of… not just since the Amendments, but also since Dobbs, there’s been a paradigm shift since Dobbs in what is going on with the abortion debate, how should we proceed, how should we be thinking about this, what are our priorities, what are our strategies. And then we have Dobbs in June, and then only a few months later we have, you know, for the first time, really, these opportunities to have these state-level fights, and sort of our first testing. And it went very very difficult, very very difficult. And we’ve got a lot of people that are feeling discouraged, and they’re feeling like we don’t know where we should go from here. And we want to talk about why did this happen, why did we lose every single one.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: And what should we be doing differently,and what can individual people who aren’t necessarily part, like head of a major pro-life organization, what can they be doing? That’s the focus of this episode.

Josh: Yeah. So where do you want to start?

Monica: So I want to start with kind of a post-mortem of these five amendments. So I’m going to try to be brief. For those who don’t already know, California had Prop 1, which essentially further expanded abortion access. Which is kind of ridiculous. I’ve lived on with my entire adult life in California, there’s not an abortion that they don’t like.

Josh: No.

Monica: They already were pushing for things that are unheard of in the rest of the country, they’re…

Josh: And wanting to fly women in from other states, and pay for their abortions and travel.

Monica: They… this is not even close to all of it. Before any of this, before Dobbs, they were already requiring public universities to provide abortions on campus, okay? They just recently signed legislation saying that they will forgive student loans for medical students who provide abortions after they graduate.

Josh: [gasping]

Monica: You didn’t know that.

Josh: No, it’s okay, so here’s the thing. I have not been able to track the state level stuff. Hardly at all.

Monica: It’s impossible! It’s been crazy lately, you know.

Josh: I just kind of talked about, like what if we could hire someone that kind of keeps their fingers on the pulse with every fifty states.

Monica: Well, and with California it’s like, oh, they’re doing another crazy thing. Oh, they’re doing another crazy thing.

Josh: Right, so you will surprise me a lot. Anytime you’re telling me stuff, specific stuff going on in a certain state, I probably don’t know it.

Monica: Sure.

Josh: And I’m happy to know it, but I haven’t been able with everything else.

Monica: Sure, sure, sure. So California had Prop 1, which further expanded their already ridiculous situation. And it’s important to note that people look at California and New York as like, the craziest. You need to understand that, in fact, California and New York (I know this is hard to believe) have more restrictive laws than New Mexico and Colorado for abortion. Okay?

Josh: Really?

Monica: New Mexico and Colorado and other states, too, have literally no gestational limits on abortion. I want to be very clear about this. When New York passed its reproductive Health act in, I think 2019, the pro-life side was saying, oh, they’re allowing abortion at any stage for any reason. Okay? What they meant was they were expanding the legal circumstances under which someone could get an abortion post-viability later in pregnancy. But technically, if you look at the laws, there’s still some kind of restriction you have to… even if it’s a broad “health” exception, there’s something there. Colorado, Oregon, New Mexico, some other places, they don’t even pretend. They don’t have any restrictions, just whatever you want. Okay? So we focus on the places that are expanding access because they’re going from a bad situation to worse, and we’re trying to stop that, and then we either can or can’t. And we don’t realize that they’re actually not the worst. That said, California passed Prop 1, which further expands access, broadens the reasons, has vague language that may be construed to mean you can’t have any limitations. We’ll see how it plays out in court, but if it goes anything like the way almost everything abortion related goes in California, it’s going to be even more than they were doing before.

Josh: Can I ask you a specific California question before we move on to the others?

Monica: Yes.

Josh: Because I’ve been getting asked this sometimes and again, I haven’t been able to fact-check it yet. And you are literally my favorite fact-checker in the entire pro-life movement.

Monica: I may or may not know, so we’ll see.

Josh: I’m always sending people to Secular Pro-Life for like the fact-check kind of research…

Monica: That is a symbiotic relationship. so.

Josh: It is a really really helpful thing you do. I know there are other pro-lifers that do it, I just like you guys the most by a pretty wide margin. So, I’ve heard that… I think this amendment, unless I’m quite confusing or conflating two things, was going to allow infanticide. And there were people talking about that. What… like that’s very hard for me to believe. Or at least I don’t think the intention would have been…

Monica: Sure, sure.

Josh: Give me the…

Monica: So of course the amendment doesn’t say: hey, infanticide is fine. It doesn’t say that. And this goes for Michigan as well, actually. The concern is that these propositions are written in a very broad way, that it could be interpreted later by the courts to negate previous restrictions. And so for example California’s proposition, and I don’t remember the exact text of language, but it’s basically saying that people have this right to reproductive autonomy, the right to make their own decisions about abortion. And it doesn’t say in there, except, you know, after viability. Except in these situations. It just says broadly, you have this right. Now, the other side will argue, okay, but we already have this other legislation saying: but these are the limitations. And surely the courts will interpret it that way.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: And then our side is saying, oh, will they? Because you’ve made it very broad and you’ve made it very affirmative, and it’s not at all clear that they’ll say, okay. Which… is it the previous restrictions that will, you know, come out in the end? Or is it this new thing you passed that says: hey, you have this right, don’t interfere with it.

And Michigan had a similar problem, where they weren’t just talking about abortion. They also talked about how you cannot penalize pregnancy outcomes, and pregnancy outcomes could include stillbirth. But the problem is, if you have a case of actual infanticide, and you don’t know if it’s infanticide or stillbirth because you haven’t investigated it, and an investigation is seen as a penalty, then they were saying there could be a situation where the authorities can’t actually investigate it to see if it was a infanticide or not, because then you’re penalizing a potential pregnancy outcome. Now, it might not play out that way. But it wasn’t clear that it wouldn’t.

And this is not just hypothetical, there have already been cases where there were situations… and when I say infanticide, I mean leaving a newborn to die. I don’t mean like, stabbing them in the face. I mean, you kind of just walk away and don’t take care of them, and they die from exposure or something.

Josh: Right.

Monica: And then there are people (and granted these are people on the internet, take it for what it’s worth) but there are people with viral tweets talking about how you shouldn’t be investigating this because you are criminalizing pregnancy. For real.

Josh: Pregnancy.

Monica: Yeah, like you have a born child, and they no longer are alive, and the authorities are looking into it and people are objecting because it’s criminalizing pregnancy.

So there is concern about being very very clear about what are our limitations here, and both the proposition in California and the one in Michigan, the pro-life side was very concerned about how broadly they were defining these rights with no limitations. You know, in Michigan is another example. The proponents of Prop 3 in Michigan were saying it’s essentially a state level codification of Roe v. Wade. It doesn’t say Roe v. Wade, but it’s basically trying to have what a lot of Americans see as a compromise, and making sure you can get abortions in some situations, but it doesn’t have to go crazy. But it was written so it was written vastly more broadly than Roe v. Wade. And for those people who don’t know, and a lot of people don’t, I see this all the time, Roe v. Wade said you could not reasonably substantially limit abortion before viability.

Josh: When combined with Casey.

Monica: When combined with Casey, right. Yes, exactly. Basically the first (roughly speaking) first two trimesters you can’t really do a lot of limitations. After that you can if you want to. It did not say you had to. Which is why there have always been, before Dobbs, there have always been multiple states and Washington, D.C. where there are no limitations on abortion whatsoever. But most Americans think of Roe v. Wade as: early is okay, late is not, that’s what we’re going with, everything’s fine, right?

Josh: Never.

Monica: That was never true. But let’s say that it was true (and it wasn’t). Now we’re having these state-level things where they’re saying okay, we got rid of Roe v. Wade, which was this great compromise — no it wasn’t. Okay, but let’s say that it was. And so we want to put in our state an equivalent of that compromise, okay? Michigan built Prop 3 this way. And so they’re saying we’re just saying you know make sure there are some reasonable rights. But Prop 3 didn’t say: hey, early on it’s fine, later it’s not. Prop 3 said: you have a right to reproductive autonomy, and it includes all of these things in all of these ways.

Josh: They’re going to codify the actual Roe and not what people thought Roe was.

Monica: They’re going to qualify worse than Roe. Roe didn’t say you… Roe said you can limit it after viability if you want.

Josh: Right.

Monica: These propositions aren’t even saying you can do that.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: They’re just saying you have a right to reproductive autonomy or your reproductive freedom, or however you want to word it, and people can’t interfere with that. And they’re putting no restrictions on it. And so our side is saying, well, so wait… so like, parental notification laws. If someone says oh, you have to tell your parents you’re doing this. And that’s considered, you know, a restriction on your reproductive autonomy. Will you get rid of parental notification laws? And they’re like: No. And you’re like: Why not? And they’re like: Why? We’re not. What do you mean? It sounds like, if you read the text as it says, it says every individual doesn’t say every individual. It doesn’t say every individual over eighteen. It doesn’t say any kind of limitations you can put on that by gestational age. Like, I’m just reading the text as it says, and it doesn’t specify any of these limitations that most Americans do support. Most Americans support parental notification laws.

Josh: Right.

Monica: It doesn’t say you can do that, and you’re like: well we’ve always done that. Okay, but this is new legislation. You get that, right?

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: This is new. This is a new thing. So backing up a bit, you’ve got Prop 1 in California, Pro-Life San Francisco and other groups did a lot of work fighting it, but they were outspent (and I looked this up) ninety-seven to one. Okay?

Josh: Wait. What was out spent ninety-seven to one?

Monica: Prop 1 in California (I wrote this down), the committee in support of it spent 12 million dollars, and the committee against it spent 129 thousand dollars. Okay?

Josh: Wow. Okay, so is that factoring in any… is there like other pro-life activities that were going on like against this that…?

Monica: Yes, I’m sure there were. This is literally just the formal committees for and against it, that’s what ballot PD measures, so this doesn’t capture everything.

Josh: Okay, so this isn’t on the same side than like, Planned Parenthood might also have been adding stuff that wouldn’t have counted.

Monica: There could be other things going on, like you could have ads that weren’t specific about the ballot initiative, about abortion in general, you could have lots of different things. This doesn’t capture all possible spending. So it might have not been ninety-seven to one, it might have been, you know, eighty to one. Whatever it was. The point is…

Josh: It seems unlikely that the pro-lifers had like matched it outside of…

Monica: No, and I get why. You have finite resources and time, and a lot of us look at California as, like more of a… long-term goal, you know?

Josh: [laughing] Yes.

Monica: But they did, but Pro-Life San Francisco and other groups did put effort in to fight it, and it seems pretty ridiculous, because it was riding on the wave of Dobbs. Like, they’re attacking our reproductive freedom. Not in California! Are you kidding?

Josh: Right, right.

Monica: California does not have an abortion access problem.

Josh: No, no.

Monica: They do not, no. Okay? There’s some statistics that estimate (and we don’t know for sure, because they don’t report their numbers to the CDC) but there are some statistics that estimate that something like one in ten or even one in six abortions in the country happen in…

Josh: Yeah, I’ve heard one in five. Twenty percent happen in California.

Monica: Yeah, there are plenty of abortions in California. But in response to Dobbs, they did all of these different expansions, including Prop 1, to make sure that they guard their very well guarded right to abortion. And so anyway…

Josh: So I just want to… just to make sure everyone’s tracking. I’m going to tell you what I basically hear you… I’m going to summarize what I hear your answer being to the infanticide question and in general. What I hear you saying is that as kind of a major pushback to Dobbs, you’ve got amendments that are, you know, maybe even performatively over the top pro-choice or pro-abortion or whatever.

Monica: Sure, right.

Josh: And because they’re trying to do that, they’re not doing what a lot of legislation does, which is put really clear borders around it. It’s more of this declaration.

Monica: No, they’re just saying you have a right to abortion, period, end of story, full stop. What’s that mean?

Josh: That’s why pro-lifers are concerned that maybe they will go even further outside those bounds than most people would think they would be.

Monica: Yes. Exactly.

Josh: Okay. I’m tracking now. That’s helpful.

Monica: So those were the big ones: Prop 1 in California and Prop 3 in Michigan. Now, to be clear, Prop 3 was a lot closer than Prop 1. California… I wrote it down. 66.3% voted in support of it, 33.7% opposed. In Michigan it was closer. It was 56.7 to 43.3. And Michigan also had closer spending. We were still outspent two to one, but that’s not ninety-seven to one. The pro-lifers in Michigan worked so hard trying to oppose that bill, and they and they knocked on hundreds of thousands of doors, and they talked to lots of pro-choice people. They weren’t even saying: hey, abortion is wrong and it kills a valuable human being. They were saying: hey, did you know that this is very broadly written and it might undo parental consent laws. It might undo these common sense…

Josh: Right. Very smart strategies.

Monica: Right, exactly. A lot of people are like: oh, I don’t want to go that far. Like they… a lot of Americans, they want to make sure a woman isn’t going to have her life threatened because she can’t get care. But that doesn’t mean they want to get rid of all possible restrictions, of course. So they worked very very hard, but in the end they weren’t able to do it, and now it’s in their state constitution, which is equivalent to Roe in some ways, in terms of how difficult it’s going to be for them to undo this. That was the really hard one.

But then, as a cherry on top, there were three other states that didn’t get as much attention. So in Kentucky, they had sort of the opposite, where they were trying to put in their constitution that there’s no specific right to abortion. They weren’t outlying abortion, they weren’t restricting abortion, they were saying it’s not specifically a constitutional right. That’s what they were saying. And in Kentucky where there wasn’t as much attention spent, it was pretty close: 52% to 47, but to be clear, we were outspent eight to one there. And it failed, and I think at least in the circles I ran, in we didn’t pay as much attention to that. I think people thought that that would be safe in Kentucky.

Josh: Yeah, Kentucky.

Monica: And it was not. Similarly in Montana (this one is very frustrating), they had a born alive protection amendment.

Josh: [gasping]

Monica: Yes. And now again, I’m not talking about all possible spending on it, I’m just talking about the formal committees, but they had a committee opposed to it that spent $715,000, and guess how much the committee that was supporting it spent?

Josh: I’m gonna guess hundreds of thousands.

Monica: Nothing. There was no committee supporting it, okay?

Josh: Really?

Monica: Not that Ballotpedia could find. I think because they thought that it was just an obvious common sense thing.

Josh: Oh, see I had It reversed in my head, I thought you’re asking how much the pro-choice compared to 17 grand. Okay.

Monica: Oh, sorry. No, so the people opposed to a born alive protection amendment spend about $700,000, the people opposed to it.

Josh: Protecting the born alive infants.

Monica: And the people supporting it had no official committee supporting it.

Josh: Got it.

Monica: Now, okay. Most generous interpretation: The pro-choice side will say: the reason this failed is because it was written very poorly, and it would have required doctors to do invasive painful procedures on children born early from… like, wanted children born early in various medical circumstances, and you’ll have to do invasive instead of palliative care, and it’ll be really destructive for the parents already going through a difficult time, and you’ve written this in an ignorant way that’s going to interfere with people even outside of abortion. That was their argument.

Josh: Is that true?

Monica: It depends on the interpretation. They were using the same language others have used before where that has not been the result.

Josh: Okay.

Monica: Right? So it’s this… it’s kind of the same problem that we’re having on a wider scale here, where we’re taking language that, in my opinion, in some cases is abundantly clear, abundantly clear, and people are saying this is confusing, and so I can’t treat people. You know? So there’s a whole debate there. But…

Josh: Yes, we’ll get into that before we…

Monica: We’ll get into that. But, so, most generous interpretation, you’re a pro-choice person and people are like: why would you ever be against offering care to a child born alive after a botched abortion? You want to kill babies? The argument was: this is too broad, and it’s going to cause interference in really difficult situations where we would all agree that palliative care is more appropriate. That was the argument.

Josh: Okay.

Monica: Okay. And so that was defeated, too. And then lastly, Vermont, almost an afterthought, they had the right personal reproductive autonomy. Very similar to California and Michigan, where it’s just kind of this declarative, like, even though they’re already pro-choice and they already have legal abortion. And that passed. But nobody even really paid attention to that one, honestly. Because it was like, okay, well, yeah. Go on, then.

Josh: …you’re gonna win.

Monica: Yeah. So all… those are the five amendments. Now, five might not sound like a lot. It’s actually a lot. There’s not usually nearly this many amendments on abortion in a given year. And we lost every single one of them. So one of the points I’m trying to underscore is that we were outspent on all of them, and not just on the ballots specifically, like the specific amendments. But also, Democrats spent more on ads related to abortion and to Dobbs than they did on anything else, by a lot. It was something like 400 million dollars nationally on ads related to abortion leading up to the midterms. I am not a political strategist, I’m actually notoriously bad at predicting politics, so take it with a grain of salt, but I think that that was one of the only issues where they saw that they had some significant public support, because other concerns about the economy and and other issues were much iffier. And so they really wanted to hit where they were strong, everyone’s concerned about Dobbs. And so they rode on that. Okay. But it’s still something we need to talk about. Because it’s not just about being outspent. You’re being outspent on something that people do feel very conflicted about, where there’s room, where the spending will make a difference.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: That’s the point. You know, they didn’t out they didn’t worry about outspending Republicans on the economy because they didn’t see as much wiggle room to convince people that they’re the people to go with. But on abortion they saw that, and we need to talk about that, you know?

Josh: Yeah. So what does this mean, do you think, for how Americans feel about abortion?

Monica: Well, polls have shown very consistently for a very long time that Americans are conflicted about abortion. Sometimes they hold what would seem like contradictory views. Broadly speaking, Americans are more comfortable with first trimester abortion, not so much later. If you get in this (they don’t poll on this as often), but if you ask about reasons, they’re very comfortable with abortion if her life is threatened, if her physical health is in serious danger, if there’s a fetal disability. You know, medically indicated abortions.

And I’m defining that broadly, we can get into, you know, what does it mean fetal disability? But something to do with some kind of medical situation, Americans are very supportive of that. If you start to ask about socioeconomic reasons or if…. some polls have even said: for any reason. That’s the quote. They’re like, I don’t know, not so much. And so even before Dobbs, and it seems to look like it’s still this way now, Americans generally support it early and for dire medical reasons. And they don’t support it late, and they don’t necessarily support it for just any reason. And that’s broadly how they feel.

Now we have Dobbs, I think (and you and I have talked about this) if you could do a bell curve of abortion debate activism, we live in the tail of the pro-life activists.

Josh: Right

Monica: And we often engage with and see the tail of the pro-choice activist that’s where — especially for us, we’re almost completely online. We see a lot of that.

Josh: Right

Monica: We need to remember that most Americans are in the curve.

Josh: Yes.

Monica: They have, um, much less information. Okay, and I’m not — I’m not faulting them. Everyone cares about twenty-five different things. You know, how much time can you spend on something. They also, in my opinion, don’t want to talk about this. Americans don’t like talking about this.

Josh: Yup.

Monica: Whether they’re nominally pro-life or nominally pro-choice, it’s a very uncomfortable topic. It gets people very angry very fast. A lot of people don’t want to get yelled at at family dinner, you know.

Pro-choice or pro-life. Not just our side, right. And, um, they get comfortable with the status quo. Roe was the status quo my entire life. Before my life, before your life, right? For a lot of people. And a lot of people, incorrectly, believe that Roe was this nice middle ground and they just wanted to be left alone about it. And we have, um, destroyed that possibility, which I am very happy about, by the way. But, Roe was the status quo. We just upended it and it’s only been a couple months. And people are very uncomfortable, and people are trying to figure out what that means for them, what that means for their families, what that means for their state laws — all these things.

I think that, um, as time goes on, there’s what has there been? Twelve, maybe more states that have passed extremely restrictive abortion laws, either at conception or at heartbeat that have so far not been challenged. That are in place. That could change, but it provides an opportunity for them to see as time goes on that the sky actually isn’t going to fall. And so there’s some proportion of people who will not be okay with that, because they believe in the pro-choice view as hard as we believe in the pro-life one. But, there are a lot of people who initially are worried and they’re reading all these stories about women not being able to get care and what’s going to happen and, you know, will it be, you know, war in the streets? And what’s going to happen is: no there won’t. And you’re going to get an opportunity as time goes on and these states have banned abortion where the sky isn’t going to fall, and some proportion of people are gonna be like, “Okay whatever.” Not necessarily like, “Oh, this is great!”

Josh: Yeah

Monica: But just kind of like, “I don’t want to talk about this,” and moving on with my life. You know, that will happen, but it there has not been enough time for that yet. So —

Josh: I agree with all of that analysis. That’s — that’s the way that I’ve been seeing it too.

Monica: Right. And so, um, there’s also an element I think not really thinking, “Okay what do I think about abortion? Is it moral or not? And why or why not? And what do I think about bodily rights? And what do I think about fetal personhood?”

No. I think for a lot of people it’s like, “I’ve been uncomfortable with abortion, but Dobbs happened and everyone’s really mad right now and I saw my sister post something on Facebook about being pro-life and then my cousin quit talking to her. You know what? I’m out. I’m out. I don’t want to be involved.”

Even pro-life people. Like, and when I say pro-life people, I mean people who are personally opposed, but they’re not activists, right.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: Give that time to calm down, too. You know, you’ve — I’ve had this happen the whole time I’ve been a pro-life activist where something will happen in the media that’s very upsetting — Dobbs is obviously much bigger than most things that have happened before — but, it’s very upsetting. And you’ll have the, uh, “If you don’t believe in a woman’s right to control our own body, unfriend me now.”

No! I’m not gonna unfriend you. I’m not gonna unfriend you. You know what, I’m gonna stay friends with you and continue to annoy you with my friendship. If you want to unfriend me —

John: I’ll make you unfriend me, right?

Monica: Yeah. But — and they won’t unfriend me because all I post on Facebook is stuff about my kids, you know — and then eventually, over time, they’ll be less angry and we can maybe have a conversation about it. But now might not be the time.

Josh: Right.

Monica: Actually when Dobbs first happened, we and — and and social media exploded — we did put out a piece (and I highly recommend it on our blog) sixteen responses to claims about Dobbs, if you want to talk about it. But I also did say on our Facebook, “You don’t have to talk about it right at this very moment.”

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: You know, people are very upset.

Josh: They’ve got abortion fatigue at best.

Monica: Right. And, and not specific to the abortion debate: there — there’s always a situation, um, when people get really upset in anything in life. It could be a fight with your spouse, it could be something at work, it could be that you stubbed your toe — it doesn’t matter. Everybody has a period of time between the event that made them mad and being able to think rationally again.

And some people that’s a very short period of time. My brother is notoriously objective, and he’s kind of like give him about thirty seconds and then he can tell you — he literally would be like, “I’m so mad right now, and it’s because of these reasons,” like, are you mad? You don’t sound mad. You know, but then one of my sisters, give her a month, you know, and get back to her.

It’s different for different people. And that’s for everyday things. You talk about something huge like this where it’s all the stuff in the media, and everyone’s yelling at each other…You don’t have to convince people to be pro-life thirty seconds after Roe v. Wade got overturned. You know?

So, to recap: we are outspent. People are conflicted. People are scared and worried, right and and, we don’t — the battle is not over. And nobody thought that if we overturned Roe v. Wade, we would just be done and be able to go home. All that meant — all that meant is that now we are at least free to actually have the conversations. Now, we’re at least free to take the fight to the state level.

It doesn’t mean we’ll win every single time.

Josh: Yup.

Monica: It means now we can at least try.

Josh: Right.

Monica: So I want to make a point here. This is really important. You would think that after Roe v. Wade was overturned, the pro-life side would erupt in joy and feel like this is the momentum we’re going to carry forward for years. Right? In fact we saw a lot of people, especially in the first few days and weeks, but even now months later, we’ve seen a lot of people contact us despondent and disheartened and worried and not sure what the future brings.

Josh:I don’t blame them.

Monica: Because you have it overturned, you have this huge backlash in your personal lives and socially, right, on a national level, too. Then you have these amendments and we lose every single one of them. And people are like, “Well, what are we doing?” I don’t blame you for feeling that way, but I wanna — I wanna take a ten thousand foot view here for a second.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: We are way ahead of where we were last year, ten years ago, my whole life. Do not be confused, okay. Roe v. Wade had to go.

Josh: Yeah. This was a necessary condition to the things that pro-lifers really want —

(talking simultaneously)

Monica: Not sufficient.

Josh: Right.

Monica: But necessary.

Josh: Necessary, but like, first thing that’s gotta get done.

Monica: And we were seeing this before Dobbs even was coming down the pipeline, we would have people all the time where we would talk about, complain about Roe v. Wade and we would have pro-life people — not just pro-choice people, pro-life people — like, “You know if Roe v. Wade is overturned, that doesn’t outlaw abortion.”

Yeah dude, I know that. Thank you. Thank you for clarifying that.

Josh: So, I feel like there were a lot of people that didn’t understand.

Monica: I knew that! You don’t need to tell me, okay?

Josh: I know that you understand that. But, you understand more than 99% of everyone.

Monica: Fine, fine. So, to be fair, you’re right. A lot of people — a lot of people did not know what Roe v. Wade did —

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: — and what it means. And, and by proxy didn’t know what Dobbs did, right? And they didn’t understand what that meant either.

Josh: Right.

Monica: So, for anyone who doesn’t know, I’m not trying to — not everyone is as obsessed with this as I am. I understand, okay. Like we said, Roe made it basically impossible to pass meaningful legislation before, like, the first two trimesters roughly.

Josh: Right.

Monica: Or before viability when you get Casey involved.

Josh: Right.

Monica: And then after that you could, although you did not have to. That is what Roe did. And I want you to understand that was radical. Okay?

Josh: Yes.

Monica: Internationally, most countries have come to a more moderate position than that.

Josh: Yes.

Monica: Internationally, trying to pass a 15-week ban would not be considered insane.

Josh: Yeah

Monica: Okay, but in America it is. Because Roe established a standard that we’ve been used to for decades that is actually quite extreme.

Josh: Yes

Monica: So that’s what Roe did. And that means what Dobbs did — Dobbs did not tell anybody to do anything about abortion. Technically, all fifty states could say we don’t want to have any gestational limits at all. They could all do that.

(talking simultaneously)

Josh: It’s like the Supreme Court is slowly backing out of the issue..

Monica: They’ve removed themselves from the equation!

Josh: They’re like, “It’s not our thing anymore.”

Monica: Which is so funny, because they’re like, “This is judicial activism!” It’s the opposite —

Josh: Right

Monica: — of judicial activism. They’re literally like “We’re out!”

Josh: It’s them undoing judicial activism.

Monica: Yes.

Josh: They’re like, “This shouldn’t have happened in the first place…”

Monica: You’re right that judicial activism is involved, but not in the way that you think.

Josh: So we’re going to pull the plug.

Monica: So Dobbs didn’t say you have to outlaw abortion. Dobbs didn’t say — Dobbs didn’t say much, to the dismay of pro-lifers. Dobbs did not say fetuses are people.

Josh: Yes. Correct.

Monica: Dobbs said: “We’re out.”

Josh: Right.

Monica: Whatever you want to do —

Josh: Right.

Monica: Okay? And so people think Dobbs meant abortion is outlawed. And in an indirect way in some states, yes.

Josh: Right.

Monica: Because it allows states to do that.

Josh: ‘Cause there were trigger laws already. On both sides.

Monica: Yes.

Josh: There were trigger laws on both sides.

Monica: Yes. But, Dobbs didn’t say you had to do any one particular thing. The pro-choice movement can and will try to expand abortion access in all fifty states —

Josh: Yes.

Monica: — and we will try to do the opposite. And now we can. Before, our hands were tied. Before — before we couldn’t even require admitting privileges, okay.

Josh: Yeah, yup.

Monica: I don’t know if you recall, um, the Supreme Court before Dobbs. I had — I had no hope for Dobbs for a long time, okay —

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: — because I’m very cynical. Before Dobbs, you had Supreme Court cases where, first Texas had an admitting privileges case and it went to the Supreme Court.

Josh: Yup.

Monica: And Roberts voted, “Yes, you can do this,” and overall the Supreme Court said, “No, you can’t.” And then two years later, Louisiana had essentially exactly the same case.

Josh: Right.

Monica: Essentially exactly the same case and Roberts changed his vote because now there was precedent that you couldn’t.

Josh: Right.

Monica: I remember that day. I remember pro-lifers were like, “We can’t even require admitting privileges.” We’re not even trying to outlaw it. We literally think that this is killing valuable human beings and we’re not even trying to outlaw it, we’re just trying to say, “You have to have admitting privileges to go to a hospital.” We can’t even do that!

Josh: Right.

Monica: Right, that was in 2019.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: Fast forward to 2022 and we have overturned Roe v. Wade. So, again I want to underscore this very, very clearly: the pro-life movement strategically, logistically, and practically is vastly ahead of where it was the whole time we’ve been doing this.

Josh: Vastly ahead of where — of where I thought we would be in my lifetime.

Monica: I never thought Roe would be challenged in my whole lifetime.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: So I was filled with joy. When the Dobbs decision came down I was by myself working on my computer and it came down and I’m not — I am not kidding. I cried. I cried with relief. Because that’s not the end of the story, but now at least we have — we are at least allowed to put up a fight now.

Josh: Right.

Monica: Or at least allowed to. So, I understand that a lot of people are feeling despondent. We lost all these amendments and that does suck. I’m not trying to belittle it. But, the lives that are involved and just the frustration of motivating people to do this work for us when it doesn’t feel like we’re getting anywhere and everyone’s yelling at us.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: It’s a big deal. I’m not saying it’s not a big deal, but make no mistake. We are so much further ahead than we — than I ever thought we would even get.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: Okay —

Josh: Yeah, from a legal perspective —

Monica: From a legal perspective, from a logistical perspective.

Josh: Because I want you to react to, to my sort of alternative version of the despondent thing that you’re talking about.

Monica: Go.

Josh: But I think it’s different. Because that day, yeah, I had my moment where I teared up a little bit when I started reading the first page of the thing and I knew what it was. But —

Monica: Music to my ears.

Josh: — very quickly, sadly all that — all that nice feeling —

Monica: This is where we disagree. Nah.

Josh: went — went far away. And it — and it stayed away. Well, well actually, I’ll — I’ll nuance it a little bit. And I — and I’ve told this story at least once before.

Monica: Okay.

Josh: But like, that day immediately was–went into busy work. Was: we had a video to publish that we had made like a month before. We’re on Twitter, Emily’s on Tick Tock. I was on the road for like six hours that day for personal family reasons, so like I’m trying to get what I can do from– so that day was just a weird day for me, for other reasons.

Monica: Okay.

Josh: But after that, when, again, I felt like most of my colleagues were, you know, doing victory laps, I felt like the weird one who was not having those feelings, because I felt like I was watching the people that I spent literally the last twenty years trying to reach shove so much further away from me than they ever had been. And so I–of course, I understood everything you’re saying about the legal thing–

Monica: Mmhmm. (in agreement)

Josh: And I was–a necessary condition to substance–substantive protections for the unborn.

Monica: Yes.

Josh: But, I also felt conflicted because at the same time, at a societal level, it felt like maybe something was happening kind of like happened with prohibition where–

Monica: Sure.

Josh: — legally things moved so much faster than public opinion, and so it didn’t last. And I was worried about, like — so that’s been the conflict in me. You disagree.

Monica: I do disagree.

Josh: Tell me about why you disagree.

Monica: I disagree for a couple of different reasons.

Josh: Okay.

Monica: First of all, you aren’t — you’re not totally wrong. Because —

Josh: Oh, thank you!

Monica: You’re not totally wrong.

Josh: Thank you for that, Monica.

Monica: But, the part where I agree with you is that there was a huge bump — not even when Dobbs came out, but when the leaked draft came out

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: Which was a good test case of what was going to happen.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: There was a huge bump in pro-choice sentiment. More people started saying they were pro-choice.

Josh: Yup.

Monica: More people started saying they think it should be legal all the time. Like, pick a metric and they got a bump. That is true.

Josh: Yes.

Monica: Okay, but if you look at this historically, bumps like that happen when big events like this happen. And then, at least with abortion, then they keep evening out. Abortion has been extremely stubborn for Americans.

Josh: Yes.

Monica: Okay?

Josh: Yes. That’s for sure.

Monica: Contrast that with other social issues. With legalization of pot or other drugs, with, uh, LGBT issues, especially gay marriage. There’s lots of things you can show where there’s —

Josh: The Overton window moves super quickly.

Monica: It does.

Josh: Yes.

Monica: Abortion has refused to do that.

Josh: Yes. That’s for sure.

Monica: Another thing to be — to point out while I’m talking about this, is you’ll see lots of coverage that will say the younger generation is pro-choice. Guys, the younger generation is always pro-choice until they get older, okay?

Josh: (laughs)

Monica: Gallup —

Josh: This is not new.

Monica: This is not new. Gallup has had polls where instead of just polling everyone in a moment and saying, “How old are you? What do you think?” They’ll take a group that’s 18 to 29 and then follow them, and they get more pro-life. And it’s been happening the whole time. And I can get into later why I think that is, and why that’s different from other social issues. And it is different. Okay?

Josh: (quietly) I would enjoy hearing that.

Monica: But, getting back to Dobbs.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: You are right that a bunch of people are going to be pushed more pro-choice. Especially as they hear all of these horror stories of people not being able to get care and things like that. That is going to happen.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: Okay. But, at the same time —

Josh: And we’re going to talk more about that, too–don’t worry.

Monica: Yeah. We are going to talk more about that, too. Yes. We’re not just going to keep mentioning it and being like, “Whatever. It’s fine.”

Josh: Right.

Monica: I’m sure it’s fine. But, at the same time, we have also had people telling us that they’ve been activated as pro-lifers either — either they were on the fence about whether they were pro-life, or they were privately pro-life and (got) more involved. And the reaction of some of the pro-choice activists to Dobbs has gotten them off the bench and into the playing field, because they couldn’t believe how vitriolic and —

Josh: So, I have not been seeing this. This is not — now I’m — I’m not hearing from these people.

Monica: This is just in my circles. This is just in the secular pro-life circles.

Josh: I believe you. I believe you. I’m not hearing from these people.

Monica: I am hearing from these people.

Josh: I’m happy.

Monica: People contact us. And so I don’t know if our group is unique this way, take it for what it’s worth.

Josh: Okay.

Monica: But we are trying to reach a demographic that is traditionally extremely pro-choice.

Josh: Yup.

Monica: Secular people, atheists, and so forth.

Josh: Right.

Monica: We also are very non-partisan.

Josh: Yup.

Monica: We are very intentional about trying to be very nonpartisan.

Josh: Yup.

Monica: Um, and so we also reach — even if they might be religious or not — more Democrats —

Josh: Yes.

Monica: More liberals, kinds of things —

Josh: On average.

Monica: Yes. On average.

Josh: They’re going to be further from the right.

Monica: So that also means that we are reaching out to people who, more often — this is just my speculation — in their geographies and social lives, um, are not “out” as pro-lifers. Um, they’re more likely to be secretly —

Josh: You mean, like, out of the closet.

Monica: Out of the closet.

Josh: Yeah. Okay, right.

Moncia: They’re more likely to be secretly, privately pro-life. And — and sometimes even their own families don’t know.

Josh: (groans)

Monica: Now, this has a couple effects. First of all, after Dobbs, these were the ones who were most likely to be despondent. Because people are more likely to mouth off to them —

Josh: Right. Right.

Monica: — about this not knowing they’re pro-life.

Josh: Right.

Monica: Sometimes even their spouses, okay?

Josh: Ohhhhhh

Monica: And they’re just like, “Okaaaay.” And they reach out to — I had people reaching out to us like, “Is there some kind of atheist pro-life Zoom chat or something? I am so lonely right now.” You know? Kind of thing, which to me was surprising. Because I’m — okay listen. I am a total zealot, all right.

Josh: Yes.

Monica: You talk about the single issue voter? That’s me.

Josh: Yes. I know that about you.

Monica: Okay? I — if we had lost — if we had not gotten Dobbs, I would have been sad and then done the same work I’m doing right now.

Josh: Right.

Monica: If we had gotten all five of these amendments, I would have been happy and done the same work I’m doing right now. This is my thing, right? But, I recognize not everyone else feels as —

Josh: Right.

Monica: — specific as I do about it. And so I was — I told you, Dobbs happened and I was… Joy isn’t the right word. It’s almost like a happy sadness. It’s almost like, the — the analogy I used at the time was like, I feel like I just spit out poison.

I’m so relieved, but I’m also angry that it was necessary. It’s a weird feeling. I’m definitely glad that it happened, but it’s not in just this, like, “Party!!” It’s more like, “Finally,” you know, kind of thing.

Josh: Yeah. yeah.

Monica: Right, and so, I felt that way and I have continued to feel that way. But — but like we said, a lot of people haven’t. Anyway, sorry, that’s a tangent. The point is, we have these demographics, but it also means there’s a lot of people in those demographics that haven’t yet decided if they really are ready to call themselves pro-life, necessarily.

I’ve had people help us, volunteer with us, and donate to us who don’t say that they’re pro-life. They’re like, “I don’t know if I would say I’m pro-life, but I like that you’re doing this right here.”

Josh: (laughs)

Monica: I’ve even had people who say they’re pro-choice, but they don’t like some of the excesses, help us. So, it’s a complicated thing.

Josh: Yes. Very interesting.

Monica: Yes, so we also had people who contacted us saying, “I want to get involved.” And when people volunteer with us, usually I try to ask them like, “How long have you been pro-life? What’s your religious background? What are you doing?” I always want to see why that — why now?

Josh: Yeah

Monica: And we’ve had several people be like — like one person, she said, “You know, I don’t usually talk about this issue and I made a status kind of trying to — I saw all these people complaining about pro-lifers, and so I made a status kind of trying to explain. You know, this is where I’m coming from. And my cousin basically called me names and blocked me. And you know what? How can I help you?”

Josh: Whoooah.

Monica: We had someone–we had someone one–of my one of my new volunteers this year– one of my favorite volunteers and I didn’t ask for permission so I won’t say her specific name but she contacted us and she said hello I am uh I have a degree in philosophy. I am a nerd. I go to an in-person local philosophy chat group to talk about Philosophy for fun. And side note, everyone: me, Monica, not that into philosophy. Okay.

(talking simultaneously)

Josh: This is my–this is my kind of person right now. I would love this person.

Monica: Yeah! This is your kind of person. So, she contacts me and is like–So she–she goes to– and this has nothing to do with abortion–she loves philosophy.

Josh: In general, right?

Monica: Yes. And she went to her philosophy meetup group, um, the next time they met after Dobbs. And somebody there started mouthing off about how terrible pro-lifers are, and she was really mad. Because, that’s not the purpose of the group. How dare you assume everyone here agrees with you? The standard thing. Now, she didn’t say anything, I believe, in that very moment. She reached out to us, and she said, “I want to get more involved.” I was like oh my gosh, especially philosophy major?

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: I — I — Yes. Come.

Josh: We can use more of those.

Monica: And she has been enormously — so we have what I call spite donors and spite volunteers. And that is people who are donating to us and volunteering with us because they’re mad at somebody else, okay. and she is the best spite volunteer I have ever had. She’s so smart, and she’s so, you know I could go on about that. The point is we have people who have seen how this is going, and moved more in our direction. Now, on aggregate, I do think most people moved more pro-choice, the polls showed that.

Josh: Yes.

Monica: Okay, I don’t think it’s a permanent effect. But, I do think it happened but I’m telling you there’s a back and forth there.

Josh: Okay.

Monica: Okay? And as we see — as we see the other side push a lot harder for more extreme things, I think we’re going to see more people pushed away from them. So right now, the most recent thing was Dobbs and before we were used to you know this protected legal right to abortion at least in the first two trimesters, and now that’s not a sure thing.

Josh:Right.

Monica: And people reacting to that, but we’re also seeing California, Michigan, and other places — and not just not just legislation, but also talking points. Where they are increasingly starting to say, “Any time, any reason, doesn’t matter, not our business.” And Americans don’t like that. And that is starting to happen more. And I believe — and maybe I’m just the consummate optimist I — believe that is not going to work.

I believe that the more vocally they try to say, “Any time, any reason, not our business,” it’s going to backfire on them. It’s not going to be that everyone — I don’t think the Overton window is going to move. I don’t think everyone’s gonna be like, “Okay, this is fine,” it’s going to be like, “Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.”

Josh: Right.

Monica: You know? Um, it’s one of the reasons we talk about it a lot. We talk about it a lot through Secular Pro-Life, because late-term abortion, elective late-term abortion — which is a real thing that does exist — is an entry point for moderates. It’s an entry point for people who aren’t sure, um, to start to see where we’re coming — they might not become pro-life, they might not be like, “Okay, conception, bam, done!”

Josh: Sure.

Monica: But, they can at least see how like, hmm, this is a complicated issue.

Josh: Seems pretty barbaric —

Monica: It’s not, “Abortion is healthcare. End of story,” there’s — there’s, you know, a conflict of rights here.

Josh: Right.

Monica: It’s an important entry point, and they’re starting to embrace that a lot more now. Emily. Your Emily. Equal Rights Institute’s Emily —

Josh: Yes.

Monica: — when she went on MSNBC recently —

Josh: Yes.

Monica: She hit that note so perfectly. Oh my gosh, I was so proud of her. But, essentially they did the same bumper sticker nonsense, and she was like, “Okay. Well, doesn’t that mean any time, any reason?” And their response was, “That’s rare.” Okay, but —

Josh: Right.

Monica: How does that answer my question?

Josh: And only, for, you know, these like serious situations.

Monica: I could tell she was ready to answer that, too.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: She just did amazing. I — I just, quick side note plugging you guys–

Josh: Okay, thanks. (laughing)

Monica: Okay, I was so compelled. I reached out to her immediately, I was like, “I am so proud of you! That was amazing. You couldn’t have hit it better with the content, the delivery, the demeanor. Just: chef’s kiss,” and I promoted it heavily on our channels —

Josh: Thank you.

Monica: — and we had so many people being like, “That was so satisfying because — to get to see a pro-life voice on, um, on a hostile audience and have the opportunity to say what they want to say.” It shows how rarely that happens.

Josh: Yes.

Monica: You know? And kudos to MSNBC —

Josh: Absolutely.

Monica: — for letting that happen.

Josh: Yup.

Monica: And it also showed that you can have an early 20-something young woman who has some training with you guys but no — no formal background in this, go up against — what was it? The president of NARAL? And they had nothing!

Josh: And a doctor and a lawyer.

Monica: They had nothing. It really underscores — and I can’t say this enough — the pro-choice activist position is completely fragile. It exists off of myths and a lot of support from a very supportive, like, media infrastructure, and a lot of money. And that’s important —

Josh: Right.

Monica: — and those are significant things that we have to figure out how to overcome.

Josh: And like a lot of personal experiences.

Monica: But the — the content of what they’re actually saying is vacuous nonsense. And Emily was able to make short order of it in ten minutes.

Josh: Stunned by how bad their responses were — it was almost like they were —

Monica: You were stunned? I was not stunned. Do you think they secretly had some really great argument you’ve never heard before? That they were waiting until MSNBC to say?

Josh: No. No, no, no.

Monica: They don’t!

Josh: That’s a straw man.

Monica: Okay.

Josh: I wasn’t expecting some — a brilliant philosophy from the president of NARAL. But I was also expecting her to be able to understand the difference between the biological part of the debate and the philosophical part of the debate.

Monica: You know why they can’t, Josh?

Josh: Why? Tell me.

Monica: Because they literally live in an echo chamber, okay?

Josh: Yes.

Monica: They don’t hear our voices. They don’t hear Equal Rights Institute. They hear their own stereotypes of pro-life people —

Josh: That seems fair.

Monica: — either actual living stereotypes or more likely just them telling each other.

Josh: Right.

Monica: They don’t know what our arguments are. There’s no — there’s a reason that the vast majority of the time, pro-choice activists cannot even begin to articulate the most fundamental premise of our position. They have no idea what we’re saying.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: They think we’re motivated by misogyny and money and people’s sex lives. We’re actually motivated because we care very, very deeply — committed for life —

Josh: Mmhmm (agreeing)

Monica: — to human rights issues and they missed that. To their detriment. And now that Roe is gone and we’re allowed to actually have these conversations, I recognize that in the first four months, we didn’t immediately have victories everywhere. But, I firmly believe that we are right. We have biology and ethics and truth on our side. And when we get a chance to have an even playing field, an equally-sized megaphone to the other side, we will annihilate them. Because all they have is bumper stickers. And Emily demonstrated that.

They — she says, “Hey, you know, what about thalidomide? Obviously, it’s not, you know, unlimited.” And they’re like, “Anyway, so, it’s really about health care.” What? What are you talk—? Okay. I’ll come in again. You let me know where I lost you.

Josh: I was just, like, I want — I want to send them so many Secular Pro-Life articles that debunk every single thing they’re saying.

Monica: And they’re — they ignore it, to their detriment.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: So, one of the things I’ve tried to tell our followers — we put all this content out there — do not feel obligated to link to our website. Okay, take the content and link to it directly. Because as soon as they see our website, they’re like, “Pro-life website. Bias. Not reading it,” right?

Josh: Right. It’s like: Wikipedia. Go find this source. Here’s some links to those.

Monica: Yes. It’s exactly like that. And so, it’s not going to hurt my feelings if you don’t tell them it came from us. Just get the content out there to them. But, I also want to point out that the fact that they won’t read it because it’s pro-life, that’s a huge mistake on their part. They are not prepared for this debate because they think that they don’t have to talk to us.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: And that was one of the other things that Roe did. It made it so you didn’t have to debate it. Because you had so much legislation — legislative inertia on your side.

Josh: Right.

Monica: And you could say, “Well, it’s legal. Get over it.” Well it’s not. It’s not

Josh: Let me, I want to add one, like, layer to that, though. Because I — I love how you’re saying like, it’s fine if people aren’t linking to your stuff as often as we are —

Monica: I mean, if you want to link to it, you could link to it.

Josh: But — but there are going to be some people that your followers — who will be interacting with, where it will — it would seem like it would be even a benefit if what they’re linking to starts with secularprolife.org. Because —

Monica: The secular is the benefit, the pro-life is not.

Josh: Secular’s in the name, right, but so — is this going to be dependent and hopefully they’ll try to work out which one is more important.

Monica: So, I will caveat that.

Josh: Yeah, okay.

Monica: Most of our content is not about being religious or secular. Most of our content is just arguments against abortion.

Josh: Yes.

Monica: And if you are having a debate with someone, for example, about: does late-term elective abortion exist? Does an embryo have a heart? So on and so forth, feel encouraged to get the resources from our website and link to them directly. Just skip us completely. But, if you’re having a debate about how nobody is against this except for Christians —

Josh: Right.

Monica: If you’re having a debate about how this is imposing on people’s freedom of religion… okay, yes. Then, yes. Emphasize us in that sense. So, it depends on what you’re talking about.

Josh: Yes. Yeah, that’s a good point. Yeah, okay, so clearly just like you and I both thought, this is going to have to be a two-part discussion. Because we’ve spent most of this time talking about like what the situation is —

Monica: Right.

Josh: In order to answer the question, what then should we do now?

Monica: Right.

Josh: Um, so before we close this out and — and record a part two, if you could give one of your answers to, what should the pro-life movement be doing right now, let’s do that? And then, we’ll go into part two.

Monica: Okay. If there is nothing else you can do, then at minimum, what you should be trying to do is very intentionally and thoughtfully, pick the right time and place, and talk to people about abortion. People have high emotion and low information. There’s a lot of information we can give them that will add complexity to the issue, at minimum. And not just that. They need to know that you’re pro-life. They need to know who pro-lifers are. They need — I have, so I was in California my whole adult life, pretty much. Basically none of my friends were pro-life. Right? And a lot of my friends who are pro-choice didn’t know any pro-lifers except for me. At all. But just knowing — just only me. Just only me — the only one was enough to inoculate them against the most ridiculous stereotypes.

Because we are friends — we don’t talk about abortion all the time. We don’t talk about abortion — not much at all.

Josh: Right.

Monica: In some cases, we never talked about abortion. I just let them know that I am against it. That’s it. And then they know, well, she’s against it and she is not a woman-hating crazy religious person.

Josh: Right.

Monica: And so, it doesn’t make them pro-life. But, it helps keep them from being like — that seems like an exaggeration. So, if there’s nothing else you do — intentionally and carefully, you don’t have to get into a big debate about abortion, you could just say, “I don’t really agree about that.”

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: I don’t — you can even say, “I don’t really want to fight about it. I would just appreciate it if you would keep in mind when you’re talking about it in front of me, that I don’t agree about that.”

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: You could just say that. You could just say that, and you’re still doing pro-life work because you’re helping get people thinking, “Who agrees with me and who doesn’t? And why or not? Is what I’m saying ridiculous? Is what I’m saying rude?” You know?

Josh: And people are more influenced by what the people around them think than they arguably ought to be, but they are.

Monica: That is the way it is. Let’s just skip —

Josh: What they — they are. Yeah.

Monica: And so, and in particular, talking to —

Josh: I’m with you.

Monica: Talking to my pro-life friends who are in geographies and social circles where you are maybe even the only pro-life person you know, I respect that you want to be very, very cautious especially in your professional life. And you’ve got to do what you’re comfortable with. And I respect that. But, you also need to keep in mind, you are in a unique position. The pro-lifers we know who live in largely pro-life and largely Christian and conservative communities, they’re just talking to each other. We all know. Okay? That — you are an ambassador. You are in a place that a lot of other pro-lifers cannot get to.

Josh: Yup.

Monica: So, just keep it in mind. And I have stories about this. My brother, who is an atheist in Portland, okay, and not at work, but in certain social situations with other people, every now and then, they’ll be like, “Yeah. I don’t agree.” And they’ll be like, “Wait. What?” And then — you don’t have to have the whole debate right there in that moment. He has converted people. He has converted secular, pro-choice Portlandears just by saying, “Well, but what about this? But, what about that?” In one case, he had someone, they — they went the whole round and the guy bit the bullet on infanticide. And he was like — and my brother instead of being like (GASP!)

Josh: Right.

Monica: He was like, “Okay. Well, I can’t argue with that. You’re consistent.”

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: And the guy was like, the guy was like, “Well, I don’t feel very good about this.”

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: That was the beginning of a conversion.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: Okay? So, to reiterate, if you are a Democrat or an atheist or a feminist or a religious person in a very more liberal area or you just, you know, you have a lot of pro-choice people in your social circles, do what you’re comfortable with. But, if there’s nothing else you can do, you can just let them know that you don’t agree. That’s it.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: That is a huge step.

Josh: I was literally talking about this last week in Alabama at a talk. Because I do — they asked me to do my relational apologetics talk for this — for this pregnancy center banquet. And I always give, like, some tips at the end of it. And you’ve basically just described a couple of them, so I’m just gonna underline, uh, and say it maybe a little bit of a different way, and then we’ll get out. But, first, completely agree that people who are Democrats, people who are liberal, or anywhere on the left, anyone who is secular has a massive —

Monica: — opportunity —

Josh: — advantage with most pro-choice people — and this goes back, and I will link this along with everything that we’ve referred to from your website in the description. But, we did a podcast a couple years ago about this persuasion study that came out of Stanford. This is the thing that got me saying Secular Pro-Life’s the most important organization. Because, functionally, one of the big takeaways from the study on persuasion — they study this — was that everything else being equal, the more that you have in common at a values level with the other person —

Monica: Yeah.

Josh: — the more likely you’re going to be to change their mind on the issue that you’re talking about. Because, they will be able to easier imagine themselves having your view because you’re not as different.

Monica: It’s giving them the opportunity to realize this is feasible. So, our board vice president, Terrisa, she was not involved in this movement. And she’s an atheist and she’s an animal rights activist and she had started to have thoughts about whether she agreed with abortion. But, she didn’t see where she would fit in, because she saw it as this largely very conservative, very Christian movement, and then when she basically found Secular Pro-Life — and she has told the story many times — she was like, “This is where it is for me.”

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: And people — people underestimate that.

Josh: Yes.

Monica: And in particular — I’m not — in particular, pro-life conservative Christian people can underestimate this and say, “Well, if you really cared about this issue, you would just do it.” Cool story, bro. Okay, that’s not how people work.

Josh: That’s not how it works!

Monica: That’s not how people work!

Josh: That’s not how any of this works.

Monica: If you have to put aside, mentally and psychologically, all these differences — sometimes very important values differences you have with people — psychologically people think, “Okay, so this is not me.” Um, yes. Some people — some people will just look at fetal person and bodily rights: Does this make sense? Is this logical? Okay, I don’t agree. And they will do that. Some people will do that.

Most people — there’s a huge element of, “Is this where I am socially? Is this going to cost me a lot?” You know —

Josh: “Does this feel correct to me?”

Monica: “Does this feel correct? What does this mean?” And so, you want to give people a vision. You can — you can be like — this is also why we talk about Christopher Hitchens. Because, people accuse us of being secretly religious. I’m like, oh, just like Christopher Hitchens was secretly religious? Right? No? No. Okay, so really, there is room. I understand — I understand that the vast majority of atheists are pro-choice. I’m not pretending they aren’t.

Josh: Yeah. Right.

Monica: I’m just saying, to act like that’s the only possible reasonable conclusion an atheist could come to is absurd.

Josh: Right. And the other thing that you said that I like just to highlight this also is — this doesn’t have to be what you talk about all the time with them.

Monica: You don’t even have to talk about it ever.

Josh: Right, like, I mean, so, that’s even going further than I usually say, and I — but I mean, like —

Monica: I mean, I like to talk about it —

Josh: But I’m — but just avoid the mistake where it just feels like, “Okay I am — because I’m an ambassador for the pro-life movement, I have to get into this every time I hang out with my pro-choice friend.”

Monica: I have to know everything about everything and be ready to, yeah.

Josh: It’s like, stop. And — and I always, this has become, for some reason, this is like this improv line. It’s become like, the line in my talk that gets the most laughs every single time. Which is, I kind of say, like, look, Christians do this a lot when they have a gay friend. Where it’s just like they feel like assuming they’re, like right wing, and thinking —

Monica: Right. Sure, sure.

Josh: — because, like, if I don’t, every single time I’m around this person, make sure they understand I don’t agree with their lifestyle, that I’m betraying God. And I’m, like, I’m gonna let you in on a little secret. They know. But, they know — you — calm down. This is not — and friends don’t normally hang out and talk about their sexuality every single time.

Monica: Right. Yeah, right.

Josh: Treat them like anyone else.

Monica: Yeah.

Josh: It’s just — it’s the same thing here. It’s weird.

Monica: Yeah.

Josh: To talk about the same issue every single time you’re around them.

Monica: Although, it’s almost the opposite, because, you could correct me if I’m wrong, I get the impression that the kind of Christian you’re talking about, they feel motivated and obligated to talk about it every time. But, the kind of pro-lifer I’m talking about, they don’t want to talk about it ever. And so what I’m saying,

Josh: Yes.

Monica: What I’m saying is —

Josh: We’re trying to bring both people towards the middle.

Monica: You don’t have to talk about it every time. And if you’re really uncomfortable, I would like you to talk about it occasionally, as you feel comfortable. But, if you’re really uncomfortable, you don’t have to talk about it ever. All I’m asking you to do, the minimum thing you can do is just say, “Just so you know, I don’t agree.”

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: And if you have the situation, a lot of people are afraid of this, that if you say that people will jump on you as the token pro-lifer to defend every single thing any pro-life politician has ever said ever, you could say, “No, I am not saying I agree with everything they’re saying. I’m saying, broadly speaking, I think abortion is very problematic and we can talk about it if you want.” Or if you’re not comfortable, you say, “I don’t really want to argue about it. I just wanted you to be aware, since you’re talking about it.”

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: My brother that I was talking about, he did this right after Dobbs. He was with a bunch of men, a bunch of pro-choice men, and they’re not even the kind of group who normally would talk about this. They’re, like, nominally pro-choice men. They’re, like, “I guess I’m pro-choice because I want to stay out of it.” Right?

Josh: Right.

Monica: And Dobbs happened, so everyone’s talking about it. And they started mouthing off very aggressively and he said, “Hey, just for full disclosure, since we’re talking about it. I wasn’t going to bring it up, but, since we’re talking about it, I don’t agree.”

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: And one of them was like, “I would really like to talk more with you about that sometime.”

Josh: Whoa.

Monica: Because they don’t know anybody to talk to.

Josh: That’s not what the pro-lifer expects in that situation.

Monica: No. Although, to be fair, he’s very prepared. But you don’t have to be. And you don’t have to know everything about everything to say that.

Josh: Yes.

Monica: You could just say that, not with him.

Josh: It’s completely fine to get into it a little bit and then end up having to say, “I don’t know,” in answer to one of their arguments. They will remember that more than anything else that you said anyway. And then go and find it. One of us has the answer on one of our websites.

Monica: Or — but also, it’s completely fine to say, “I don’t want to talk about it and I don’t want you to either.” And, I mean, I know that’s not what we’re going for —

Josh: Boundaries.

Monica: — with dialogue. But, like, I have definitely had —

Josh: I agree.

Monica: — especially when I lived in California — in professional settings —

Josh: Yes.

Monica: — people start going on, I’m like, “I don’t think you should be talking about this at work.” And then, they already know you don’t agree, because you wouldn’t say that if you agreed.

Josh: Right.

Monica: They already know. I don’t even have to say it. I could just be like, “I don’t really want to talk about this at the lunchroom.”

Josh: Right.

Monica: “I don’t really want to talk about this,” and then that’s —

Josh: Totally appropriate.

Monica: That’s still — I know you might not think that’s pro-life work, because you’re increasing representation, you’re making people think a little bit more about this. And so, again, to anyone who isn’t already in strongly pro-life circles, you know. Um, just think about that.

Josh: Yeah.

Monica: You’re in a good position.

Josh: Yeah. I really agree with that. Okay, we’ve got more to say. But, we’ll do that next week in the part two. This has been so fun. I’m so glad that you’re here. I can’t wait for the rest of these.

Monica: Okay, great. [Music]

Related Links:

Emily Albrecht on MSNBC:

Podcast: Behind-the-Scenes: Emily Discusses Abortion With NARAL President on MSNBC:

Podcast: What New Research Tells Us About Persuasion:

The post What Should the Pro-Life Movement Do Now? (with Secular Pro-Life’s Monica Snyder) – Part 1 appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 12:23

Josh explains how some upgrades to our podcast equipment will save us time editing the episodes later and how that will affect our listeners.

Related Links:

The post Announcement: Podcast Production Changes appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 40:07

Josh Brahm was invited to answer questions about abortion late last year at Fusion City Church in Kannapolis, NC. Pastor Brian Duncan had preached on abortion the week prior and asked Josh to help field the questions that came from the congregation afterward.

*Sorry for the bad audio during the intro. I forgot to grab the better audio before I formatted the SD card.

Chapters:

• 00:00 Introduction
• 03:19 Pastor introduces Josh
• 04:05 Josh summarizes the origin of his pro-life work
• 05:25 Pastor Brian on self-defense and the right to life
• 07:40 What if the mother’s life is at risk?
• 11:34 But isn’t every pregnancy potentially life-threatening?
• 17:19 What about cases of rape or incest?
• 20:24 How would you respond to the argument that the unborn aren’t biologically human until they become a fetus?
• 23:33 “If someone should have the choice to use drugs or have multiple sexual partners, should they also not have the choice to have an abortion?”
• 26:38 How would you respond to a pro-choice Christian who says this: “My personal issue with the entire Roe v. Wade overturn was not so much the abortion aspect but the loss of bodily autonomy for me and my sisters and daughters. If the movement wasn’t so rooted in the dirty word of abortion, I think many people would have an easier time thinking of Pro-Choice as having a choice over one’s body which everyone has and almost everyone exercises to some degree. People choose to eat a vegan diet or a carnivore diet, both with very different reactions in the body. People choose to drink energy drinks despite the consequences of heart damage. People choose to be vaccinated or not, both with varying outcomes. People choose to smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol. People choose to give their boy child a circumcision or not, way before the child is ‘self-aware’, both offering varying outcomes. Saying “my body, my choice” is not pro-murder. It is pro-autonomy, and I have no issues with that whatsoever.”
• 31:43 What are some areas where pro-life people sometimes don’t follow their logic to their natural conclusion?
• 34:01 Final thoughts

Related Links:

Refuting “Abortion as Self-Defense”

Fusion City Church:
https://fusioncitychurch.com/

The full-service video:
https://youtu.be/tQsZ15iw4PY

Pastor Brian’s previous sermon on what it means to be pro-life:
https://youtu.be/I8V0r-1atlE 

The post ERI LIVE: Q&A with Josh at Fusion City Church appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 1:48:13

We’ve received hundreds of messages and comments about Emily’s appearance on MSNBC last week! By popular demand, Josh and Emily are joined by Tim Hull to discuss the behind-the-scenes story of how Emily ended up discussing abortion with the president of NARAL on national television live from NBC studios in New York City!

In this episode, Emily will share the story of her trip to 30 Rockefeller Plaza, including insights into what she chose to say (and not say!) on air and how she was treated by MSNBC. Josh, Emily, and Tim will also watch the MSNBC segment together, reacting to the pro-choice arguments made and providing additional talking points pro-lifers can use to respond.

If you’d like to watch MSNBC’s published version of the segment, you can do so at the link below!
https://on.msnbc.com/3gCfDi1

Related Links:

Diane Greene Foster & Katrina Kimport for Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health: Who Seeks Abortions at or After 20 Weeks?

Katrina Kimport for Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health: Is third-trimester abortion exceptional? Two pathways to abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy in the United States

Secular Pro-Life: Responding to 7 pro-choice claims about embryonic hearts

Secular Pro-Life: Later Abortion landing page

Secular Pro-Life: Embryonic Hearts

The post Behind-the-Scenes: Emily Discusses Abortion With NARAL President on MSNBC appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

MP3 Download | 1:31:33

Josh and Emily share interesting stories from their last two semesters of campus outreach, and some of the trends they’re noticing among pro-choice college students.

This is part two of the series, and includes the story of protesters apologizing to us, why we might change the way we promote Emily’s speeches, the creative ways the pro-choice students at St. Olaf are now countering our outreaches there, an innovative pro-life response to a Jainist, and an improved response to people who bite the squirrel bullet! Then they discuss trends and recommendations for future pro-life outreaches.

Related Links:

Abortion Dialogue on Campus: Outreach Stories and Trends – Part 1:
https://youtu.be/_u6nAL0FTjk

How One Student Group Radically Changed Their Campus Culture:
https://youtu.be/lAsOzyg7M2c

The Equal Rights Argument:
https://youtu.be/louYc-9cvE0

How Josh Should Have Dealt with a Hostile Audience in Canada:

Firebombings and Vandalism: Planned Parenthood Must Condemn Jane’s Revenge:

How Should Conservatives Respond to the Disturbing Trend of Campus Censorship?

Six Ways I’ve Seen Pro-Choice People Try to Censor Pro-Lifers:

Abortion and Medical Necessity: Improving the Pro-Life Approach:

ERI LIVE – What Should I Say in a Post-Roe America?
https://youtu.be/0eGpYM1I-5Y

Defining the Word “Abortion” Will Change Your Dialogues (with Dank Pro-Life Memes):
https://youtu.be/A8TVroArQLw

A Simple Change That Instantly Communicates a Nuanced Approach to the Abortion Debate:

Why I Changed My Pro-life Elevator Pitch:

Abortion Images: A Case for Disagreement without Division:

Godwin’s Law Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

The post Abortion Dialogue on Campus: Outreach Stories and Trends – Part 2 appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 1:18:10

Josh and Emily share interesting stories from their last two semesters of campus outreach, and some of the trends they’re noticing with respect to abortion dialogue among pro-choice college students.

This is part one of a two-part series, and includes the story of a young woman who chewed Josh out in Wisconsin, how Emily varies her “elevator pitch” based on who she’s talking to, the way Josh thinks about swearing at outreach, and more!

The post Abortion Dialogue on Campus: Outreach Stories and Trends – Part 1 appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 – 1:19:17

Transcript here

It’s the question we’re asked more often than any other, and we want to answer it carefully. The question is, “What should I do about the pro-life activist near me who is being difficult? Should I approach them differently than I do my dialogues with pro-choice people?”

Josh and Emily invited ERI Lead Editor Andrew Kaake and Secular Pro-Life’s Executive Director Monica Snyder on the show for a two-part discussion on the way they think about responding to online comments, eight common types of difficult pro-life people, and how you can respond to them.

Click here to listen to part 1.

Note: Sorry for the occasional distortion with Josh and Emily’s mics. They’ve had a good six-year run, but we’re replacing them before the next time we record (the mics, not Josh and Emily). We also had technical issues with Monica and Andrew’s video streams due to technical issues. All of their audio is here, but the video is missing.

Related Links:

Secular Pro-Life:
https://secularprolife.org

AHA: The Anti-Abortionists Who Fight Other Pro-Lifers (with Jonathon Van Maren – Part 1)

AHA: The Anti-Abortionists Who Fight Other Pro-Lifers (with Jonathon Van Maren – Part 1)

AHA Fails to Understand Pro-Life History (with Jonathon Van Maren – Part 2)

AHA Fails to Understand Pro-Life History (with Jonathon Van Maren – Part 2)

Abolitionists Are Going to Get People Killed, and the SBC Just Helped Them
https://bit.ly/3h8t6Lh

Fellow Pro-Lifers: Please Stop Sharing This Straw Man Meme
http://bit.ly/2gBf9XR

ERI Bodily Rights Materials Landing Page
https://equalrightsinstitute.com/bodilyrights

Speech: Monica Snyder on Deconstructing Three Pro-Choice Myths

Deconstructing Three Pro-Choice Myths

Speech: Monica Snyder speaks at the Dobbs #EmpowerWomenPromoteLife rally

SPL post asking why people became pro-life
https://bit.ly/3dcsHZP

Should Pro-Lifers be Snarky? (with Dank Pro-Life Memes)

Should Pro-Lifers be Snarky? (with Dank Pro-Life Memes)

Chapters:

• 00:00: Introduction
• 01:24: Type 5: The Ones Who Are Hurting the Movement
• 11:17: Type 6: The Ones Who Don’t Understand the Argument…
• 25:53: Type 7: …Or the People Making the Argument…
• 33:36: Type 8: …Or the People Getting the Abortions
• 47:27: How can pro-life advocates encourage members in these categories to think or act differently?
• 1:09:19: Are we being hypocritical for pointing out difficult types of pro-lifers?

The post Responding to 8 Types of Difficult Pro-Lifers (with Monica Snyder & Andrew Kaake – Part 2) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 1:38:10

Everyone has been talking about the tragic case of a 10-year-old who was raped, became pregnant, and driven across state lines to get an abortion. Even President Biden referenced her story in public. Multiple ERI followers have asked us how pro-life people can answer questions about this story without sounding like a moral monster.

Josh and Emily invited licensed mental health counselor Robin Atkins to discuss the story with us. Our conversation included the rules regarding public discussion of patient information, particularly in CHINS cases, and the damage done if the rules are violated as well as how pro-life people should talk about this story.

Bio: Robin is a licensed mental health counselor, specializing in reproductive issues. She also has a philosophy degree. She spent four years doing home-based therapy with the Department of Children’s Services. She’s a pro-life advocate with an atypical perspective on some of the issues surrounding abortion.

Note: There were some major technical difficulties on the day of recording, including some camera issues, so we just used screenshots in place of our cameras for the last bit of the episode.

Chapters:

• 00:00 Introducing Robin and this story
• 06:23 CHINS cases and why the fact checkers got this story so wrong
• 35:14 Can abortion treat the trauma of rape?
• 53:31 Examining an apparent contradiction in what Robin said about how Ohio treats these crimes
• 57:36 Is it actually more physically dangerous when a young person is pregnant?
• 1:19:02 How should abortion laws treat a situation where a doctor claims that their patient has a life-threatening pregnancy?
• 1:27:26 How should pro-life people talk about cases like this?

Related Links:

The source that Robin read from about laws governing confidentiality in CHINS cases:
Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2022). Disclosure of confidential child abuse and neglect records. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Children’s Bureau. https://www.childwelfare.gov/topics/systemwide/laws-policies/statutes/confide/

Reprotection:
https://www.reprotection.org/

The post The Pregnant 10 Year-Old: Thinking Well About This Tragic Story (with Robin Atkins) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 – 2:44:29

The days after Roe v. Wade’s overturning have been riddled with confusion, panic, anger, protests, and misinformation. There has never been a more important time for pro-life advocates to provide clarity, explain what overturning Roe v. Wade really means, and describe how we want to see our society move forward. Josh, Emily, and Andrew went live on YouTube and Facebook to help you think clearly and respond effectively to the most contentious issue of the moment.

After summarizing what the Dobbs decision did, the staff pull the curtain back on what their experience was like on the day that Dobbs came out, and their emotional reactions to the situation since.

Then they discuss the question of whether pro-lifers should be even trying to get into dialogues right now, given the heated emotions right now.

Finally they respond to these common pro-choice arguments right now:

• Back-alley abortions
• Pro-lifers don’t care about babies after they’re born
• Handmaid’s Tale
• “This is a step back 50 years for women’s rights”
• “People will still get abortions anyway!”
• “You’re going to force women to die from tubal pregnancies. Are doctors really not allowed to do live-saving procedures?”
• The maternal mortality rate in Mississippi
• “Justice Thomas’ concurrence proves that they’re coming after same-sex marriage and birth control next!”
• “You can’t force people to donate organs. Women have less bodily autonomy than corpses now.”
• “You want to throw women into jail.”
• “Women will be prosecuted for miscarriages.”

Finally the staff discuss the three steps for the pro-life movement now before taking questions from the audience.

The post ERI LIVE: What Should I Say in a Post-Roe America? appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 – 1:03:51

It’s the question we’re asked more often than any other, and we want to answer it carefully. The question is, “What should I do about the pro-life activist near me who is being difficult? Should I approach them differently than I do my dialogues with pro-choice people?”

Josh and Emily invited ERI Lead Editor Andrew Kaake and Secular Pro-Life’s Executive Director Monica Snyder on the show for a two-part discussion on the way they think about responding to online comments, eight common types of difficult pro-life people, and how you can respond to them.

Note: Sorry for the occasional distortion with Josh and Emily’s mics. They’ve had a good six-year run, but we’re replacing them before the next time we record (the mics, not Josh and Emily).

We also had technical issues with Monica’s video stream due to technical issues. All of her audio is there, but the video is missing sometimes.

Related Links:

Secular Pro-Life:
https://secularprolife.org

Monica Snyder for Secular Pro-Life: “Nine months of inconvenience.”

First episode of our two-part podcast with Jonathon Van Maren on AHA:
https://youtu.be/0SvNYXQqvuM

Chapters:

• 00:00 Introducing the guests and topic
• 02:49 Opening comments
• 09:28 ERI/SPL’s policies on responding to comments
• 18:58 8 Types of Difficult Pro-Life People…
• 19:39 Type 1: The Ones With Only One (Unpersuasive) Argument…
• 26:08 Type 2: The Ones Who Need to Stop Saying This, Now!
• 38:20 Type 3: The Ones Who Are Very Out of Touch with Reality
• 47:20 Type 4: The Ones Who Really Frustrate Monica

The post Responding to 8 Types of Difficult Pro-Lifers (with Monica Snyder & Andrew Kaake – Part 1) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 – 51:52

This is a continuation of Josh’s conversation with Gary Freeman on crossing the racial divide in pro-life work. In this episode they discuss the high abortion rate in the African-American community and why that is, and how we should think about the debate over Planned Parenthood being an allegedly racist organization.

Learn more about Major League Dad here:
https://www.MajorLeagueDad.org

Related Links:

Alan Guttmacher Institute article that Josh referenced: “Abortion and Women of Color: The Bigger Picture”:

https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2008/08/abortion-and-women-color-bigger-picture

Audio recording of Josh’s “Planned Parenthood Unveiled” presentation from before ERI, including his explanation of why Planned Parenthood is not a racist organization:
(Direct MP3 link)

Audio recording of a Q&A session from another recording of the “Planned Parenthood Unveiled” presentation with more discussion on the racism question:
(Direct MP3 link)

Live Action’s investigation on Planned Parenthood systematically covering up sexual abuse:

ERI’s coverage of the Center for Medical Progress videos:

Live Action’s investigation into “racially-motivated donations”:

Angela Franks’ book “Margaret Sanger’s Eugenic Legacy: The Control of Female Fertility”:
https://amzn.to/3FeSR8t (affiliate link)

Josh Chatraw’s book “Telling a Better Story: How to Talk About God in a Skeptical Age”:
https://amzn.to/3snHjun (affiliate link)

Chapters:

• 00:00 The way pro-life people tend to talk about this statistical disparity
• 4:46 What is going on with the African-American abortion rate?
• 8:21 Is the Alan Guttmacher Institute right that the higher unintended pregnancy rate among African-Americans is part of the puzzle?
• 11:20 Is Walter Hoye right when he says that abortion is less stigmatized in the African-American community?
• 15:45 Why Gary doesn’t use the word “privilege” in the way it often is used
• 16:42 Josh summarizes some of the reasons pro-lifers tend to call Planned Parenthood a “racist organization” and his take
• 22:37 Gary’s response
• 26:29 Acknowledging examples of real racism in the abortion industry
• 27:24 How pro-life people could better help these people not choose abortion
• 29:16 Considering Live Action’s racism investigation
• 33:54 Considering Margaret Sanger
• 44:58 Should pro-lifers talk about Margaret Sanger in order to get African-Americans to distrust Planned Parenthood?
• 48:20 Why pro-lifers should be careful how they talk about Planned Parenthood with pro-choice people

Disclosure: The books above are Amazon affiliate links. This means that, at zero cost to you, ERI will earn an affiliate commission if you click through the links and finalize a purchase.

The post What’s Really Up with the High African-American Abortion Rate? (with Gary Freeman) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3: 42:17

This is a continuation of Josh’s conversation with Gary Freeman on crossing the racial divide in pro-life work. In this episode they contrast Gary’s position with those who say that you can’t be pro-life unless you agree with them on other social issues, why people in black churches are distrustful of Gary as soon as he calls himself “pro-life”, and how the church could have possibly made Black Lives Matter irrelevant.

If you haven’t listened to the first part of this conversation, do that first for this section to make sense in context.

Learn more about Major League Dad here:
https://www.MajorLeagueDad.org

Chapters:

• 00:00 Contrasting what Gary’s saying with the pro-choice people who say that you can’t be pro-life unless you agree with them on the death penalty, animal cruelty, etc.
• 10:06 “Are you saying I have to become a Democrat in order to have pro-life views?”
• 15:39 Why people in black churches are distrustful of Gary as soon as he calls himself “pro-life”.
• 20:32 How the old way of responding to “you’re only pro-life if you do X” doesn’t work anymore.
• 24:54 What should white conservatives take from Black Lives Matter and what should they not?
• 30:18 How the church could have possibly made Black Lives Matter irrelevant.
• 35:14 What could both the white church and black church have done better after George Floyd was killed?

The post Talking “Black Church”, “White Church”, and the Pro-Life Movement (with Gary Freeman) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 1:02:23

This is the first of a three-part series of conversations with Josh and Gary Freeman, a former guest on our podcast. In this episode they discuss Gary’s new ministry, on relationships being key to white and black people understanding each other better and successfully crossing the racial divide, as well as the need to serve people well in spite of cultural differences.

Learn more about Major League Dad here:
https://www.MajorLeagueDad.org

Chapters:

• 00:00 Introducing Gary and his new ministry
• 05:23 Why Gary is choosing to focus his ministry on local needs, instead of national work
• 10:20 Setting the stage for this episode
• 13:28 Where Gary is politically
• 17:45 Where Josh is politically
• 21:16 Why does there have to be a “black church”?
• 33:33 On white and black people understanding each other more through relationship
• 48:25 On the need to serve people well in spite of cultural differences

The post A Black Pro-Life Speaker on Crossing the Racial Divide (with Gary Freeman) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 – 37:54

While at our AirBnb in Washington, D.C. we filmed a set of podcasts with Emily, Jacob, and Meredith Maloley. Meredith helped Emily run the pro-life club at St. Olaf, and now volunteers as an ERI Club Coach and works at a Pregnancy Resource Center.

In this episode they discuss (and refute) the most common myths that organizations like NARAL and Planned Parenthood spread about pregnancy centers. They then finish by talking about the most helpful (and least helpful) things pro-lifers can do to help PRCs.

Chapters:

• 00:00 Introduction
• 1:41: Myth #1: Pregnancy centers are fake medical clinics
• 6:51: Myth #2: PRC’s coerce or manipulate women into not having abortions
• 20:19: Myth #3: PRC’s are only pro-birth
• 28:37: What is actually helpful for the average pro-lifer to do for a PRC, and what should they not do?

The post Refuting Myths about Pregnancy Centers (with Meredith Maloley & Jacob Nels) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 – 1:05:06

While at our Airbnb in Washington, D.C. we filmed a set of podcasts with Emily, Jacob, and Meredith Maloley. Meredith helped Emily run the pro-life club at St. Olaf, and now volunteers as an ERI Club Coach and works at a Pregnancy Resource Center.

In this episode they discuss what pro-life advocates ought to know about how PRC’s work behind the scenes, Meredith’s journey from ERI-style college dialogues to counseling at a PRC, and comparing and contrasting her methods with Jacobs.

The post Transitioning from ERI Training to Pregnancy Center Work (with Meredith Maloley & Jacob Nels) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 –  1:13:33

Download a PDF transcript of this podcast here

Jacob interviews Missy Stone, CEO of Reprotection, a new organization that helps pro-life advocates protect women and children from harm by investigating and closing down dangerous abortion providers.

In this interview you will learn about how Reprotection works, the many government agencies that regulate abortion facilities, a few crazy stories, and how to get information to Reprotection so they can do what they do best while you stay focused on sidewalk counseling.

Learn more about Reprotection at:
https://Reprotection.org

Contact Reprotection at Info@Reprotection.org

Chapters:

• 00:00 Introducing Missy and Reprotection
• 14:31 Why clinics are often poorly maintained and run by sub-optimal doctors
• 17:21 What Reprotection does
• 21:36 The government agencies involved in regulating abortion facilities and why bad reports are sometimes ignored
• 30:28 A success story
• 37:39 A horror story from Florida
• 58:33 How you can send tips to Reprotection and what they’re looking for
• 1:07:44 Why Reprotection was launched after initial testing

The post Reprotection’s Innovative Approach to Closing Abortion Facilities appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is widely considered to be the most important Supreme Court Case on abortion in nearly three decades. We want you to understand what’s happening in real-time and equip you with tools to discuss it effectively. ERI staff members Josh Brahm, Andrew Kaake, and Emily Albrecht listened live to the oral arguments, and went live the next evening to share their perspectives and answer your questions! This is the case everyone will be talking about, so prepare yourself to have productive dialogues about it!

Thanks to Tim Hull for hosting the live stream!

Links Mentioned:

Bookmark this fetal pain study!
https://jme.bmj.com/content/46/1/3

More on the amazing story behind this study at this great post from Secular Pro-Life:
https://secularprolife.org/2020/06/th…

ERI Blog – Arguing From Equality: The Personhood of Human Embryos:
https://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com…

Here’s a landing page with lots of resources from ERI on responding to bodily autonomy arguments:
https://equalrightsinstitute.com/bodi…

ERI Blog – Pro-Lifers Aren’t “Forcing” Women to Stay Pregnant:
https://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com…

Quick Response #7: Banning Abortion Forces Women to Stay Pregnant:
https://youtu.be/Xk3lLdEg39Q

ERI Blog – Is Abortion 14 Times Safer Than Childbirth?:
https://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com…

ERI Blog – Why Viability Is the Least Plausible Definition of Personhood:
https://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com…

Stand to Reason Podcast – Tim Barnett with Josh Brahm: These Are the Best Arguments Against Abortion:
https://youtu.be/3wcym_PI-f8

The post The Supreme Court Abortion Case: Your Questions, Answered appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 1:32:27

In this episode Muslim intellectual Dr. Javad Hashmi refutes pro-choice arguments made by famous Islamic scholars.

Javad T. Hashmi is a board-certified emergency physician, former Fellow of Medical Ethics at Harvard Medical School, and a PhD candidate in the Study of Religion (Islamic Studies) at Harvard University. In addition to his medical training, Dr. Hashmi holds a bachelor’s and master’s degree in Arabic & Islamic Studies from U.C. Berkeley and Harvard respectively.

Related Links:

Watch the first episode with Javad:
https://youtu.be/mcsTsOna-A4

AltMuslimah: “I am a Muslim Woman and I chose to Have an Abortion”

Dr. Irving in International Journal of Scoiology and Social Policy: “When do Human Beings Begin? ‘Scientific’ Myths and Scientific Facts”

The statistics on why women have abortions was quoted from Abort73.com/s U.S. Abortion Statistics page, which is quoting the Guttmacher Institute’s 2004 survey of 1,209 post-abortive women
(Abort73)
(Guttmacher Survey Table – PDF)

Hamza Yusuf: “When Does a Human Fetus Become Human?”

YouTube clip #1: Abortion in Islam | Animation
https://youtu.be/B6iUY1kks-s

Dr. Omar Suleiman: Islam and the Abortion Debate:

YouTube clip #2: Islamic Ruling On Abortion due to Medical Reasons
https://youtu.be/yY6n7glG6Y0

YouTube clip #3: Is Abortion permissible in Islam or not? – Sheikh Assimalhakeem
https://youtu.be/-Z6DygN6IJI

BeautifulIslam.net (South Asia article): Abortion and Doctor’s Situation

Islam Question & Answer: Ruling on aborting a pregnancy in the early stages

YouTube clip #4: The Ruling on Abortion | Mufti Abu Layth
https://youtu.be/SU9McOtBDT8

Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice: Islam and Reproductive Choice

ERI Bodily Rights landing page:
https://EqualRightsInstitute.com/BodilyRights/

Follow Javad at https://twitter.com/DrJavadTHashmi

Chapters:

• 0:00 Introducing Javad
• 1:52 Muslim opinion polls on abortion
• 3:13 Javad’s view vs. how Muslims typically think about abortion
• 6:14 Josh clarifies Javad’s view
• 9:45 How science intersects with the abortion debate
• 10:24 Why women have abortions
• 12:48 Javad’s more liberal views on women’s rights within Islam
• 15:39 Wrapping up on statistics
• 16:41 Another pro-life Muslim scholar
• 18:01 Introducing YouTube clip #1
• 19:29 On Muslims believing the soul is breathed into the fetus at 120 days after conception
• 21:40 Next clip
• 21:48 On Muslim clerics not permitting abortion for financial reasons
• 24:43 Next clip
• 25:00 Muslim leaders sometimes say they are more pro-life than they actually are
• 26:02 Next clip
• 26:12 Responding to rape and fetal deformity exceptions
• 30:26 Next clip
• 30:52 More essentially pro-choice policies of Muslim clerics
• 31:31 Different Muslim views of ensoulment
• 36:38 Dr. Suleiman calls his position “neutral”, but is it really?
• 38:51 Next clip (including setup)
• 40:38 On Muslim cleric’s misrepresentation of Catholics on life of the mother exceptions
• 43:22 On common inconsistencies in Muslim’s views on abortion
• 45:08 Responding to the viability argument
• 46:54 Javad on pointing Muslims toward Christian philosophy
• 47:28 Next clip
• 47:54 More inconsistency
• 48:09 Next clip
• 51:32 This Muslim cleric says that 80 days after conception matters!
• 54:05 Pro-choice issues from even conservative, traditionalist Muslims in South Asia
• 55:16 More pro-choice positions from a conservative Muslim website
• 56:37 Setting up clip from a “bad boy” liberal Muslim making weak pro-choice arguments
• 57:54 Next clip
• 1:00:15 Responding to “I’m not going to force my views on others” argument
• 1:02:06 Responding to “nobody chooses abortion lightly”
• 1:04:46 Next clip
• 1:07:43 Responding to the “gradations of life” idea
• 1:12:48 Quick reviews of other Muslim videos and articles
• 1:18:13 Bodily autonomy arguments
• 1:27:34 What caused Javad to begin reconsidering his views on abortion?

Equal Rights Institute Website:
https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equal Rights Institute Blog:
https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equipped for Life Course:
https://EquippedCourse.com

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass:
http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com

Host: Josh Brahm
Guest: Dr. Javad T. Hashmi
Audio/Video Editor: Chapter One Films & Josh Brahm
Publisher: Jen Westmoreland

The post Muslim Intellectual Debunks Pro-Choice Islamic Scholars appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 – 1:19:55

This is the first of a two-part series with Muslim intellectual Dr. Javad Hashmi. In this episode Josh interviews him about his journey from pro-choice to pro-life and how Muslims think about moral culpability and human value. They spend the rest of the episode having an impromptu nerdy philosophy debate about personhood.

Javad T. Hashmi is a board-certified emergency physician, former Fellow of Medical Ethics at Harvard Medical School, and a PhD candidate in the Study of Religion (Islamic Studies) at Harvard University. In addition to his medical training, Dr. Hashmi holds a bachelor’s and master’s degree in Arabic & Islamic Studies from U.C. Berkeley and Harvard respectively.

Chapters:

• 00:00 Introducing Javad
• 01:08 Javad’s story from pro-choice to pro-life
• 04:13 A primer on American Muslim politics
• 09:24 Javad’s story continued
• 13:44 On compassion for post-abortive women
• 15:50 Thinking through the complexities of moral culpability and abortion
• 19:18 The role (or lack thereof) of religion in the abortion debate
• 26:22 What Muslims think about “first breath” and human value?
• 33:21 More on the Muslim view of human value
• 45:29 Javad interacts with how ERI staff think about personhood

Related links:

Pro-Life Apologetics: The Equal Rights Argument:
https://youtu.be/louYc-9cvE0

Equal Rights Institute Website:
https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equal Rights Institute Blog:
https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equipped for Life Course:
https://EquippedCourse.com

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass:
http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com

Host: Josh Brahm
Guest: Dr. Javad T. Hashmi
Audio/Video Editor: Chapter One Films & Josh Brahm
Publisher: Jen Westmoreland

The post A Muslim Intellectual’s Journey from Pro-Choice to Pro-Life appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 – 28:49

Jacob Nels joins host Marylee Shrider on Voices for Life, a production of Right to Life of Kern County, to discuss his sidewalk counseling ministry and the resources that Equal Rights Institute provides to increase your effectiveness outside of abortion facilities. In this episode, Jacob provides insight into fostering dialogues with abortion-minded women, including conversation starters, body language, clothing, signage, and graphic images.

Chapters:

• 0:30 — Recap of part 1
• 2:33 — Understanding what abortion-minded women are going through
• 6:53 — Conversation starters on the sidewalk
• 9:45 — Focusing on helping and loving the woman
• 10:49 — Body language and what to wear
• 13:18 — Keeping a calm presence
• 13:50 — All ages can be effective on the sidewalk
• 14:55 — Continuing the conversation throughout their time at the clinic
• 16:25 — Effective use of signs
• 18:42 — Graphic images
• 23:32 — Talking to pastors about sidewalk counseling
• 25:40 — Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass information
• 27:48 — Conclusion

Related Links:

Right to Life Kern County
http://rtlkc.org/

Equal Rights Institute Website:
https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equal Rights Institute Blog:
https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equipped for Life Course:
https://EquippedCourse.com

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass:
http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com

The post Jacob Nels with Voices for Life – Right to Life Kern County – Part 2 appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 – 27:26

Jacob Nels joins host Marylee Shrider on Voices for Life, a production of Right to Life of Kern County, to discuss his sidewalk counseling ministry and the resources that Equal Rights Institute provides to increase your effectiveness outside of abortion facilities. In this episode, Jacob provides tips and tools for engaging with alternative protestors as well as conversation starters for talking to abortion-minded women.

Chapters:

• 2:38 — Introduction to Jacob Nels, Speaker/Sidewalk Counseling Trainer at Equal Rights Institute
• 3:30 — Introduction to ERI and Jacob’s story beginning sidewalk counseling ministry
• 6:40 — Dealing with alternative pro-life presences on the sidewalk
• 11:30 — Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass information
• 12:25 — Dealing with alternative pro-life presences on the sidewalk, cont. 
• 24:13 — Understanding and reaching out to abortion-minded women in conversation starters
• 26:03 — Conclusion

Related Links:

Right to Life Kern County
http://rtlkc.org/

Equal Rights Institute Website:
https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equal Rights Institute Blog:
https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equipped for Life Course:
https://EquippedCourse.com

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass:
http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com

The post Jacob Nels with Voices for Life – Right to Life Kern County appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 55:05

Download a PDF transcript of this podcast here

Robin Atkins is back to discuss mental health, informed consent, abortion risks, the level of counseling in abortion facilities, and more.

Robin is a licensed mental health counselor, specializing in reproductive issues. She also has a philosophy degree. She spent four years doing home-based therapy with the Department of Children’s Services. She’s a pro-life advocate with an atypical perspective on some of the issues surrounding abortion.

Related Links:

Refuting “Abortion as Self-Defense” (video):
https://youtu.be/B2TakKSUawA

Refuting “Abortion as Self-Defense” (article):

Medical Apartheid: The Dark History of Medical Experimentation on Black Americans from Colonial Times to the Present:
https://amzn.to/3e8Mjvw

American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists or AAPLOG (for abortion risks):
https://aaplog.org/

You can learn more about the Turnaway Study here:
https://turnawaystudy.com

Listen to our first episode with Robin Atkins to hear her thoughts on the Turnaway Study:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yChl-sReTP0

Watch Josh Brahm’s faulty pro-life arguments speech:

Contact Robin @TruthAgape on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/truthagape

Equal Rights Institute Website:
https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equal Rights Institute Blog:
https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equipped for Life Course:
https://EquippedCourse.com

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass:
http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com

Chapters:

• 0:00 Introduction
• 1:13 Why tokophobia cases are increasing
• 3:52 How can people learn to advocate for themselves better with their doctors?
• 5:13 How informed consent relates to the abortion debate
• 9:17 Is it wrong for pro-life ultrasound laws to require internal ultrasound procedures?
• 11:43 Is it anti-free-speech to require doctors to say things required by a pro-life informed consent law?
• 16:19 How satisfied are you with the informed consent bills that pro-lifers pass?
• 19:43 How would you respond to the clinic worker who says they’re just there to provide the service their client wants?
• 22:18 Should there be screenings before an abortion?
• 23:49 Assessing the level of counseling and/or care given to women in abortion facilities
• 27:55 Where should people go for the most accurate explanation of abortion risks?
• 29:21 What would it take for a clinic worker to become qualified to give anything called “counseling” to the client?
• 31:05 What are the accurate risk factors for abortion?
• 37:47 Is the abortion causing these symptoms or are women who were already more likely to experience these post-abortion symptoms having abortions?
• 41:17 On minors having abortions
• 47:04 On pro-choice women using women who are suffering as a shield, and how pro-lifers should respond to her
• 50:18 On abortion in the case of rape

The post Mental Health and Informed Consent in Abortion (with Robin Atkins) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 1:01:26

Robin Atkins is back to discuss psychology in debate. Robin is a licensed mental health counselor, specializing in reproductive issues. She also has a philosophy degree. She spent four years doing home-based therapy with the Department of Children’s Services. She’s a pro-life advocate with an atypical perspective on some of the issues surrounding abortion.

Chapters:

• 00:00 Introduction
• 02:00 Defining communication
• 03:44 Navigating debates, in-person and online
• 05:53 Clarifying the labels “speaker” vs “listener”
• 08:25 How do you help someone who is constantly offended by the other side?
• 13:36 Ideology-driven vs. topic-driven debate
• 17:31 How do you get past people’s defenses?
• 20:03 Should our primary goal be to change minds?
• 24:49 Timing and empathy matters
• 26:27 On anecdotal evidence and miscarriage
• 31:54 On benevolent trolling and the use of snark
• 43:31 When is it time to end an unproductive conversation?
• 47:25 If self-awareness is important, how can people who aren’t self-aware discover and work on that?
• 49:11 Why is civil discourse so low right now, and what can do we about that?44
• 59:27 What is it you’d like people to take from the “Unoffendable” book?

Related Links:

Listen to our first episode with Robin, on adoption vs. foster care vs. abortion:
https://youtu.be/yChl-sReTP0
or

Contact Robin @TruthAgape on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/truthagape

Dialogue Tip: Tell Them That They Can’t Offend You:

We referenced our mutual friend Petra Wallenmeyer who is now a writing intern at ERI, as well as the Content Director for the Human Defense Initiative. Read her articles here:

Our first Humor in Dialogue podcast:
https://youtu.be/bCLQ1A2yxBg

A Comedian Shares Tips for Using Humor in Dialogue:
https://youtu.be/QVY-Fx8DTbM

Should Pro-Lifers be Snarky? (with Dank Pro-Life Memes)
https://youtu.be/dy6_6ktel2c

Charisma on Command YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/user/charismaoncommand

Brant Hanson’s book, “Unoffendable: How Just One Change Can Make All of Life Better”:
https://amzn.to/3vyJSbI 

The post A Mental Health Counselor on Psychology in Debate (with Robin Atkins) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Robin Atkins is a licensed mental health counselor, specializing in reproductive issues. She also has a philosophy degree. She spent four years doing home-based therapy with the Department of Children’s Services. She’s a pro-life advocate and has very interesting thoughts on the topic of abortion.

This is the first of three episodes with Robin. In this episode, Robin discusses the differences between newborn adoption, foster care, and abortion.

Related Links:

Watch or listen to the bonus discussion Jacob Nels had with Robin Atkins about sidewalk counseling and adoption:
https://youtu.be/HaUJMcEgpcQ

Previous ERI Podcast with Jacob Nels – “Why Sidewalk Counselors Should Not Recommend Adoption”:
https://youtu.be/jlwHUrqmPpQ

You can learn more about the Turnaway Study here:
https://turnawaystudy.com

Pastors, You Can Reduce Abortions in Your Church:
https://youtu.be/szw8ASoUZGw

One Thing Every Pastor Can Do to Prevent Abortions in Their Congregation:

Purchase “Alarmist Gatekeeping” by Dr. Deborah Garratt:
https://amzn.to/3piS8L6

Contact Robin @TruthAgape on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/truthagape

Equal Rights Institute Website:
https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equal Rights Institute Blog:
https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equipped for Life Course:
https://EquippedCourse.com

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass:
http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com

Chapters:

• 00:00 Announcement about bonus discussion
• 01:59 Introducing Robin
• 04:33 The ERI podcast episode Robin disagreed with
• 06:54 Common ground about adoption
• 09:24 The purpose of foster care
• 09:55 Problems and potential solutions
• 16:13 Should all foster kids be reunited with their bio parents?
• 18:06 Foster care issues continued
• 18:42 Safe haven babies
• 23:55 The damage done to the foster community from pro-choice people
• 25:04 The Turnaway Study
• 29:50 Do all women instantly regret their abortion?
• 33:30 Clarifying how foster care works
• 38:35 Eugenics and adoption
• 42:05 Children’s rights and consent
• 49:46 Does abuse happen in foster care as often as people think?
• 54:13 Reforms that would improve the newborn adoption system
• 59:34 Why sidewalk counselors shouldn’t bring up adoption (at least most of the time)
• 1:02:38 How churches could respond to unwed pregnancy better
• 1:10:56 Contrasting adoption and foster care with abortion

Host: Josh Brahm
Guest: Robin Atkins
Audio/Video Editor: Chapter One Films & Josh Brahm
Publisher: Jen Westmoreland

Disclosure: The book above is an Amazon affiliate link. This means that, at zero cost to you, ERI will earn an affiliate commission if you click through the link and finalize a purchase.

The post A Different Perspective: Adoption vs. Foster Care vs. Abortion appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3: 57:16

Jonathon Van Maren joins the podcast for the second part of a discussion on what is going on with a hostile anti-abortion group called Abolish Human Abortion (AHA). In this episode, Jonathon discusses the history of the pro-life movement and why it needs to be understood, AHA’s “Free the States” strategy, and what pro-life organizations and sidewalk counselors should do about them.

Related Links:

Part 1: AHA: The Anti-Abortionists Who Fight Other Pro-Lifers:
https://youtu.be/0SvNYXQqvuM

Jonathon Van Maren: How “Abolish Human Abortion” Gets History Wrong – Part 1:

Jonathon Van Maren: How “Abolish Human Abortion” Gets History Wrong Again – Part 2:

ERI Podcast: “Should Women be Prosecuted if Abortion Becomes Illegal?”
https://youtu.be/hcYDbi9baiI

“Defenders of the Unborn” by Dr. Daniel K. Williams:
https://amzn.to/2RwcnZw

“Abortion Rites” by Marvin Olasky:
https://amzn.to/33UYO8C

“Operation Rescue” by Randall Terry:
https://amzn.to/3v1eqTQ

“Wrath of Angels: The American Abortion War” by Jim Risen & Judy Thomas:
https://amzn.to/33YKuMe

Debate: Pro-Life Incrementalism vs Abolitionist Immediatism (Gregg Cunningham vs. T. Russell Hunter)
https://youtu.be/5oi4vVTae30

If you want to see Abolish Human Abolition’s account of who they are to assess it on its own terms, read “The Five Tenets of Abolitionism” on the AHA webpage: http://abolishhumanabortion.com/abolitionism/the-five-tenets-of-abolitionism/

The post AHA Fails to Understand Pro-Life History (with Jonathon Van Maren – Part 2) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 – 56:54

Jonathon Van Maren joins the podcast to discuss what is going on with a hostile anti-abortion group called Abolish Human Abortion (AHA). This is the first of a two-part series. In this episode, Jonathon discusses AHA’s origin, their slander of the pro-life movement, how they are not William Wilberforce-style abolitionists, and how they’re attempting to rewrite their history now.

Related Links:

Josh Brahm: AHA Attacks Justice For All for “Not Treating Abortion Like Sin”

Jonathon Van Maren: How “Abolish Human Abortion” Gets History Wrong – Part 1:

Jonathon Van Maren: How “Abolish Human Abortion” Gets History Wrong Again – Part 2:

Debate: Pro-Life Incrementalism vs Abolitionist Immediatism (Gregg Cunningham vs. T. Russell Hunter)
https://youtu.be/5oi4vVTae30

We referenced Dr. Michael New’s research on the effects of pro-life legislation. While much of his work is behind various paywalls, he helpfully sent a link to a 2018 policy analysis he wrote for the Charlotte Lozier Institute, where he summarized the academic research on the impact of pro-life laws:

Chapters:

• 00:00 Introduction
• 00:40 Josh on the pro-life unity happening in this episode
• 02:22 Why we’re talking about AHA
• 08:16 AHA’s origin
• 27:00 The difference between critiquing in good faith and bad faith
• 31:21 Problems with AHA-supported legislation
• 32:49 Pro-life victories and AHA’s slander
• 37:48 Why are abortion rates down?
• 39:23 Straw-manning or unintelligent?
• 40:38 “And then what?”
• 42:08 They’re not Wilberforce-style abolitionists

Jonathon Van Maren is the Communications Director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform. His writings have been translated into more than six languages, and published in the National Post, National Review, First Things, The European Conservative, The Federalist, The American Conservative, The Stream, the Jewish Independent, the Hamilton Spectator, Reformed Perspective Magazine, among others. His insights have been featured on CTV, Global News, and the CBC, as well as over twenty radio stations. He regularly speaks on a variety of social issues at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions in Canada, the United States, and Europe.

The post AHA: The Anti-Abortionists Who Fight Other Pro-Lifers (with Jonathon Van Maren – Part 1) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 – 1:20:27

Emily pulls back the curtain to explain the ways that her pro-life club leaders overcame hostility, established a good working relationship with their college administrators, dealt with vandalism, connected with the pro-choice club, and more! Even if the campus is a hostile environment, students can take proactive steps to engage in successful pro-life activism.

Chapters

• 00:00 Introduction
• 01:50 Coaching other clubs
• 04:05 Managing a club’s image
• 07:03 Dealing with vandalism
• 29:15 The importance of outreach
• 30:42 Campus rules for outreach
• 46:13 Explaining why you do outreach
• 47:27 Be transparent
• 54:34 The pro-choice club on campus
• 1:13:01 When in doubt…
• 1:18:17 If a club wants advice…

Related Links:

Email Emily at:
Emily@EqualRightsInstitute.com

How One Club Changed Their Campus (Extended Interview with Emily Albrecht)
https://youtu.be/HoSwkt1wFdY

Emily’s First Outreach Mistakes
https://youtu.be/jP-gL9ZmafU

Emily’s First Dialogue Mistakes
https://youtu.be/u5hVXb0ikcI

Here’s the meme Josh referenced toward the end:
Trying Kombucha for the First Time

Equal Rights Institute Website:
https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equal Rights Institute Blog:
https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

The post Dealing with a Hostile Campus as a Pro-Life Club appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 52:16

Now that she has talked about the initial outreach mistakes the Oles for Life club at St. Olaf made, Emily discusses their initial dialogue mistakes. Toward the beginning, she blows Josh’s mind by explaining how many of their member’s musical backgrounds made it easier for them to critique each other without anyone’s feelings getting hurt. (We bet this same thing applies to lots of artists and others too.)

Chapters:

• 00:00 Introducing the topic;
• 01:39 Mistake #1: Not knowing your strengths and weaknesses;
• 14:36 Mistake #2: Making dialogues formulaic;
• 20:39 Mistake #3: Not being willing to stand on the facts;
• 24:35 On handing people better pro-choice arguments;
• 30:05 Mistake #4: Forgetting that ‘clarity is our friend’;
• 33:20 Why pro-choice people can misunderstand the ‘trot out a toddler’ technique;
• 38:00 Bearing as much burden of proof as possible;
• 40:08 Mistake #5: Struggling to end the conversation.

Related Links:

Refuting “Abortion as Self-Defense”:

When They Bite the Bullet: https://youtu.be/4gnjKN3BOH0

ERI Website: https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

ERI Blog: https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equipped for Life Course: https://EquippedCourse.com

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass: http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com

The post Emily’s First Dialogue Mistakes appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 55:31

Our regular listeners have heard by now about the great successes of Oles for Life, the pro-life student club at St. Olaf College. In this episode, Emily Albrecht pulls the curtain back to share five mistakes their club made when they began doing outreach.

This episode will be followed by one on specific dialogue mistakes they made during their outreaches.

Chapters:

• 00:00 Introducing the topic;
• 03:11 Outreach at St. Olaf;
• 04:39 Mistake #1: Fear of starting to do outreach;
• 15:11 Mistake #2: Poorly designed outreach table;
• 28:53 Mistake #3: Struggling to start conversations;
• 34:33 Mistake #4: Not being ready to explain their purpose;
• 40:45 Mistake #5: Not being intentional about who is at the table.

Related Links:

How One Club Changed Their Campus (Extended Interview with Emily Albrecht):
https://bit.ly/30JAfdd or https://youtu.be/HoSwkt1wFdY

Abortion Images: A Case for Disagreement without Division:

Here are links to some example dialogues we’ve recorded:

Josh Brahm and Rebecca Haschke at Students for Life Conference:
https://youtu.be/tSKfxYHSarU?t=1690

Example Dialogues: Pro-Life Tim and Pro-Choice Rachel:

Example Dialogues: Pro-Life Josh and Pro-Choice Tim:

Example Dialogues: Pro-Life Rachel and Pro-Choice Tim:

Responding to the Astute Observation That I Am a Man:

ERI Website:
https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

ERI Blog:
https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equipped for Life Course:
https://EquippedCourse.com

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass:
http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com

The post Emily’s First Outreach Mistakes appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 1:02:32

Josh Brahm interviews comedian Josh Harris about how he got into sidewalk counseling, how he uses humor on the sidewalk, and some practical tips for you to use to add more humor and friendliness to your conversations about abortion!

Chapters:

• 0:00 Introducing Josh Harris;03:23 How a Comedian Began Sidewalk Counseling;
• 08:45 Humor in pro-life dialogues;
• 13:00 Combining humor with compliments;
• 31:36 Practical tips for becoming funnier;
• 40:33 Clean comedians to check out for inspiration;
• 42:41 More practical tips;
• 47:53 Friendliness in dialogue;
• 49:47 Links and a final tip;
• 55:31 What does it take to master apologetics?

Our previous episode on humor in dialogue:

You can find Josh Harris’ comedy at:
https://FunnyJosh.com

Josh Harris’ online comedy classes:
http://OnlineComedyClasses.com

Learn more about Josh Brahm’s stories of relational apologetics by watching this talk he gave at a church:
https://youtu.be/ndO3nByqVrM

ERI’s core values:

Here’s how we describe humor in that list: “We believe laughter is a gift that enriches the human experience and helps to create an instant connection between people of different walks of life, which is why we have chosen to incorporate it into our content and work environment. While we take our work very seriously, we try to not take ourselves too seriously.”

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass:
http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com 

The post A Comedian Shares Tips for Using Humor in Dialogue appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 50:12

Josh Brahm and Jacob Nels, ERI’s Sidewalk Counseling Trainer, finish reacting to videos sent in by Rebekah Dyer while sidewalk counseling. If you haven’t seen part one yet, please watch that first for more context: https://youtu.be/rqdQO_nFsGg

PARENTAL ADVISORY NOTE: Unlike the previous episode, the videos we review in this episode include very strong language. We chose not to censor it. If you listen to our podcast around your kids, this is probably one to use headphones on.

As he did before, Jacob reviews the videos Rebekah sent in with Josh, talking about what Rebekah did well, anything else he would have done, as well as commenting on the behavior of the private security officer.

Timecodes:

• 0:00 Introduction;
• 02:49 Clip 1;
• 3:26 Clip 1 commentary;
• 8:04 Clip 2;
• 10:04 commentary;
• 11:53 Clip 3;
• 12:21 commentary;
• 12:34 Clip 4;
• 13:14 commentary;
• 14:15 Clip 5;
• 15:22 commentary;
• 21:09 Clip 6;
• 21:22 commentary;
• 22:28 Clip 7;
• 22:49 commentary;
• 23:23 Clip 7;
• 23:34 commentary;
• 24:29 Clip 8;
• 24:52 commentary;
• 25:22 Clip 9;
• 26:07 commentary;
• 28:04 Clip 10;
• 28:45 commentary;
• 29:20 Clip 11;
• 29:45 commentary;
• 31:52 Clip 12;
• 31:59 commentary;
• 32:44 Clip 13;
• 33:13 commentary;
• 35:02 Final thoughts.

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass:
http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com

ERI Blog: “Don’t Be Too Nice”

If you’re a sidewalk counselor in need of legal advice, we strongly recommend Alliance Defending Freedom:
https://www.adflegal.org/contact-us

ERI Website:
https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

ERI Blog:
https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equipped for Life Course:
https://EquippedCourse.com

The post PODCAST: A Sidewalk Counselor’s Run-Ins with Police and an Overzealous Security Guard – Part 2 appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 1:02:37

Josh Brahm brings Jacob Nels, ERI’s Sidewalk Counseling Trainer, to react to videos sent in by Rebekah Dyer while sidewalk counseling. Rebekah works with Justice For All, which includes her sidewalk counseling, and has benefitted from our Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass.

Rebekah has had multiple run-ins with police and private security officers while counseling near an abortion facility in California that is part of a strip mall. Jacob reviews the videos she sent in with Josh, talking about what Rebekah did well, anything else he would have done, as well as commenting on the officer’s behavior.

We split this into two episodes because of the length.

Timecodes:

• 0:00 Introduction of Jacob and Rebekah Dyer’s situation;
• 13:28 Clip 1;
• 13:45 Clip 1 commentary;
• 18:37 Clip 2;
• 18:45 commentary;
• 19:23 Clip 3;
• 19:54 commentary;
• 20:13 Clip 4;
• 20:30 commentary;
• 20:46 Clip 5;
• 21:34 commentary;
• 23:36 Clip 6;
• 24:11 commentary;
• 25:00 Clip 7;
• 25:45 commentary;
• 27:56 Clip 7;
• 32:09 commentary;
• 35:20 Clip 8;
• 37:44 commentary;
• 38:08 Clip 9;
• 38:26 commentary;
• 41:29 Clip 10;
• 42:45 commentary;
• 43:06 Clip 11;
• 43:14 commentary;
• 45:34 Clip 12 (The rest of these were filmed on a different day a few weeks later);
• 46:35 commentary;
• 49:59 Clip 13;
• 50:44 commentary;
• 51:17 Clip 14;
• 51:25 commentary;
• 52:41 Clip 15;
• 53:27 commentary;
• 54:54 Clip 16;
• 55:30 commentary;
• 55:56 Clip 17;
• 57:08 commentary.

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass:
http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com

ERI Website:
https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

ERI Blog:
https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equipped for Life Course:
https://EquippedCourse.com

The post PODCAST: A Sidewalk Counselor’s Run-Ins with Police and an Overzealous Security Guard – Part 1 appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 36:14

We bring you the extended interview of Emily Albrecht (our newest team member!) from the recent ERI Pajama Gala. Emily explains how she got involved in the pro-life movement, and how her campus club used their training from the Equipped for Life Course to transform the culture at St. Olaf, from one where they hated pro-lifers to one where pro-lifers are respected.

• 00:00 Introduction
• 04:34 Interview with Emily

Watch the replay of our Pajama Gala, including the primary lesson of our new Equal Rights Argument module:

ERI Website:
https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

ERI Blog:
https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equipped for Life Course:
https://EquippedCourse.com

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass:
http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com 

The post PODCAST: How One Club Changed Their Campus (Extended Interview with Emily Albrecht) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 1:05:08

Jordan Warfel is our guest today because he discovered a conspiracy theory that NARAL promoted in a recent virtual conference. The theory is based on a book by Ilyse Hogue that argues the pro-life movement doesn’t actually care about babies, but is a front for evangelicals to bring back racial segregation. The discussion includes the horrible dialogue advice NARAL is giving, how both sides often communicate about opinion polls simplistically, and NARAL’s strategy to infiltrate the Black Lives Matter movement. You’re not going to want to miss this one.

Chapters:

• 00:00 Introducing Jordan Warfel;
• 2:04 Explaining the conspiracy theory and several problems with it;
• 27:11 Evidence from the modern pro-life movement that Hogue uses to support her theory;
• 29:17 The NARAL conference giving the worst dialogue advice ever and a discussion of how both sides often communicate about opinion polls simplistically;
• 38:25 Josh makes an observation and hypothesizes a conspiracy theory of his own;
• 43:37 NARAL’s strategy to infiltrate the Black Lives Matter movement;
• 46:55 Practical tips for talking to a pro-choice person who has heard this conspiracy theory that the pro-life movement is racist.

Related Links:

You can purchase Ilyse Hogue’s book “The Lie That Binds” here if you want to read it for yourself:
https://amzn.to/36vHhGh

You can purchase “Fetal Beauty” by Jordan Warfel here:
https://amzn.to/33zFMVw

ERI: Our Take on the “AKA Jane Roe” Documentary:

Josh references a 9/11 truther documentary. It’s “Loose Change.”
https://www.loosechange911.com

We feel it would be irresponsible to link to “Loose Change” without linking to counter-arguments, so here are a few helpful links debunking 9/11 truther conspiracies:
Popular Mechanics Investigates 9/11 Myths – FAQs:

Screw Loose Change – Exposing the Lies, Distortions and Myths of the 9/11 “Truthers”:

ERI: One Easy Step to Avoiding Confirmation Bias – Interview with Tangle Founder Isaac Saul:

Learn about QAnon:

The Dispatch: The GOP’s Conspiracy Theorist Problem:

The Dispatch Podcast: GOP Flirts with QAnon:

Politico: Trump accuses Cruz’s father of helping JFK’s assassin:
https://politi.co/3odlZmx

FTC disclosure: The two Amazon book links are affiliate links, meaning that if you click one of them and then purchase the book, ERI will receive a small percentage of the purchase at no cost to you.

The post NARAL Promotes the Weirdest Pro-Choice Conspiracy Theory We’ve Ever Heard appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 1:24:44

It’s our first podcast with Emily Albrecht, the co-president of St. Olaf Students for Life and our next speaker/writer/coach! Josh and Emily discuss the recent HBO film “Unpregnant” because there are themes taught in this movie that may influence some of your conversations with pro-choice people who have seen it.

***SPOILER ALERT*** 

If you would like to watch the film before listening to our commentary, we invite you to do that. We will discuss the entire plot in this episode.

• 0:00: Introducing Emily;
• 3:32: Introducing the film and our initial reactions to it;
• 7:05: Summarizing the plot of the movie;
• 10:03: How pro-life people are portrayed in the movie;
• 27:34: Why pro-choice students hated St. Olaf Students for Life’s original name;
• 33:22: Why it would be wrong to kidnap abortion-minded women or kill abortion practitioners, and Josh vents about the actual state of religious liberty in 2020;
• 45:48: An important lesson that sidewalk counselors can take from this film;
• 51:36: How the abortion was portrayed in the film and how the director specifically wanted to normalize abortion;
• 59:27: The film’s attempt to argue that it should be easier to get an abortion;
• 1:01:16: Wait, this movie supports anti-coercion forms in abortion facilities?
• 1:04:00: Final commentary on the abortion scene;
• 1:08:00: A better argument against parental notification laws than the film made;
• 1:11:16: Four points of common ground we have with the film;
• 1:19:53: Comparing and contrasting this film with preachy Christian movies.

Related Links:

• How One Student Group Radically Changed Their Campus Culture (our first video with Emily Albrecht about the effect their club had at St. Olaf College): https://youtu.be/lAsOzyg7M2c
• Our Take on the “AKA Jane Roe” Documentary: 
• Reversing Roe: Exposing the Bias: https://youtu.be/dvS6m3laO8U?list=PLsN8Ay8poS-LyKV…
• How Should Pro-Life Advocates Talk about That “13 Reasons Why” Abortion Episode? 
• Why it Would Be Wrong for Pro-Lifers to Drive Abortion Clinic Vans Under False Pretenses:
• David French: The True Extent of Religious Liberty in America, Explained:
• Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass: https://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com
• Here’s the Entertainment Tonight story Emily referenced: ‘Unpregnant’: Barbie Ferreira and Haley Lu Richardson on Making a Heartfelt Comedy About Abortion (Exclusive) https://et.tv/3f4RXho. It includes these two quotes:
  • “One thing I love about this movie is how sure Veronica is, of what her choice is, from the beginning,” the director explains. “This isn’t a movie about hand wringing, what decision to make. She knows what she wants, and that’s very much how I felt about my abortion. It felt like the right choice for me — I knew what I wanted to do and I did it.”
  • “I love the idea of normalizing the topic of abortion and reproductive rights but also telling a different perspective on it and how people shouldn’t have to feel a certain way after getting an abortion,” Ferreira adds. “There’s a whole range and spectrum of emotions that happen.”

• Josh Keefe: Why Christian Movies are BAD | The Problem with Christian Media: https://youtu.be/50_3J6Go5Ng

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: An Analysis of HBO’s “Unpregnant” Film appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 1:16:26

Josh Brahm interviews Ali Rak, an incredibly effective community organizer and activist in Maryland, to explain the nuts and bolts of how she gets people involved in contacting their political representatives in order to accomplish pro-life goals.

• 00:00 Introducing Ali and the topic;
• 13:14 Why apologetics training is important for lobbyists;
• 15:20 What Ali does as a lobbyist and community organizer;
• 38:44 Do email templates for people to send to their representatives work?
• 47:00 Tips for in-person meetings with legislators;
• 55:04 Is it possible for pro-life lobbyists to come across as too emotional when making their case?
• 59:23 Do you send email alerts with only one call-to-action or multiple?
• 1:04:08 What are the most common mistakes that lobbyists and community organizers make?
• 1:06:47 How do you keep people motivated?
• 1:10:48 How local pro-life people can work well together.

RELATED LINKS:

13 Extra Tips on Lobbying:

Here’s the link to the full audio from the David Bereit/Josh Brahm event we referenced:

One Easy Step to Avoiding Confirmation Bias: Interview with Tangle Founder Isaac Saul:

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

Contact Ali at: alexandra.petti@gmail.com

The post Become an Effective Lobbyist Using These Practical Tips (with Ali Rak) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3| 1:21:23

Josh interviews Family Therapist Julie Dodson to discuss the “Showing Understanding Skill” technique she’s been trained in. Pro-life advocates can use this skill to grow in their empathy and navigate conversations better, especially the ones that turn to particularly emotional aspects of the abortion debate.

The four steps are:
1: Listen in a way that shows strong interest.
2: Become the other person.
3: Name thoughts, feelings, concerns/meanings, and desires.
4: Accept and make corrections graciously.

Editors note: Apologies for the wonky audio on this one. Zoom did a software update and switched off the “record separate audio channels” feature, mashing all of our audio into one. So things sound kind of goofy anytime we’re talking at the same time. Now we check that feature before every recording session to make sure that doesn’t happen again!

————————-

After the recording session Julie sent a few additional notes for clarity, which we’re including below unedited:

After reflecting on time recording the podcast, I wanted to add some information and clarifications. First, in discussing anger, we see that there is both truth-based anger and lie-based anger. If all anger was bad or if it was inherently sinful to be angry, we would not see God feeling or expressing anger. There is a righteous anger against injustice, human trafficking, or the killing of the innocent unborn, for examples. But for most of us, our anger, bitterness, unforgiveness, etc. against self, others, or God that is held for long periods of time is usually lie-based anger. Lie-based anger is held, not because we want to be angry, but because, deep down, we believe that it is serving a good or just purpose for us. We have heard many reasons such as the following:
– “My anger protects me.”
– “My anger holds myself or someone else accountable.”
– “My anger proves ____ is not ok.”
– “My anger keeps me from doing that again.”
We may cognitively be aware that the anger is not actually helping us, but when life gets hard or when we are in crisis-mode, we feel, react, and make decisions, not based on what we know to be true, but what FEELS true to us, that is, what we actually believe on a deeper level.

*This perspective is informed by my work as a TPM mentor. You can find more information about TPM at https://www.transformationprayer.org/preparing-journey-introduction/ and about the TPM perspective about anger at https://www.transformationprayer.org/anger-in-the-ministry-session/. For additional “geeking out” about God and anger, see https://bibleproject.com/podcast/gods-hot-nose/.

Second, we discussed how crisis reveals belief system and worldview. What I am NOT saying is that it is wrong to care for others or that it is wrong to have concern for the health or safety of those around us. I mean that crisis reveals where we put our trust or ultimate hope. For example, if my ultimate hope is in the planet, any piece of trash or oil spill or person that refuses to recycle may be interpreted as assault on my source of hope. If my hope is in the expectations of my future, then anything that might get in the way of what I want that future to be may also be seen an attack (ex: someone with an unplanned pregnancy). If my ultimate hope is in my health or the health of those I love, anything someone might do that threatens health, even unintentionally, may be seen as an assault. And when people are scared that their hope-source is being threatened, they often react out of anger, self-protection, or protection of others. Again, this is not to say that caring for others is wrong at all. We are called as Christ-followers to love God and others. Our reaction (internal or external), however, may give a clue to where we are placing our ultimate hope and trust.

————————-

Related Links:

The “Experience Diagram” Julie references:

Here’s the sermon audio Josh referenced on the topic of honor – “A Community of Honor in a Culture of Contempt” from Bridgetown Church:

National Institute of Relationship Enhancement:
https://nire.org

Jule Dodson’s Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/julie.b.dodson

You can email Julie at:
julie.b.dodson@gmail.com

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post 4 Steps to Taking Your Empathy to the Next Level appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download MP3 | 1:27:33

Josh interviews Gary Freeman from Care Net. They talk about how Gary went from being a preacher’s kid to serving fathers in pregnancy centers, including the struggles of trying to figure out the best way to do that!

• 00:00: Introduction / Gary’s story;
• 8:02:  Gary starts serving men in pregnancy center work;
• 20:08:  What Gary did to help guys open up in these situations and begin training other centers;
• 32:18: How Gary would explain to a new pregnancy center why they need a male staff member or volunteers to talk to the guys who come in;
• 36:46: What role should men have in the pro-life movement?
• 40:31: Why is it important for pro-life advocates to talk to pro-choice guys at outreaches instead of just women who might have abortions later?
• 43:53: What do you say to a guy who says he doesn’t really care if she has the abortion but feels like he shouldn’t get a say in it because it’s a woman’s issue?
• 46:32: How do you talk to apathetic people?
• 57:40: How should pro-life people support abortion-minded and post-abortive men?
• 1:00:23: What should we say to a male friend who got his girlfriend pregnant and is now asking for advice? 1:04:28 On Gary’s work in fatherhood ministry;
• 1:12:19: What it’s like being one of the only pro-lifers at a fatherhood event;
• 1:18:18: Gary explains how some pro-life people get uncomfortable with the fact that he is doing these fatherhood events;
• 1:23:21: The most surprising thing Gary has learned working with men.

Gary Freeman is the Fatherhood and Family Program Manager for Care Net national. He’s been in the pro-life world for about 8 years. He started this journey serving as the Fatherhood and Outreach Coordinator for a local pregnancy center in Raleigh, NC. He has been speaking and training pregnancy centers in serving men over that 8 years all over the country and has been doing that formally with Care Net since May 2019. Gary loves advocating for men being involved in the pregnancy center setting, and in the pro-life initiative overall. Gary is able to assist in navigating the intricate aspects of serving men specifically in the pregnancy center setting. Gary is a graduate of East Carolina University in Greenville, NC with a B.S. in Family and Community Services, and he recently graduated from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary with a Master’s in Christian Studies. Gary has been married for 13 beautiful years to his wonderful wife Vinniece, and they have two awesome daughters Sariah(10) and Jordyn(4).

Related Links:

Connect with Gary to speak in your area: https://GaryFreemanSpeaks.com or email him at gfreeman@care-net.org or garyfreeman07@gmail.com

Learn more about Care Net: https://www.care-net.org

Why We Need Male Sidewalk Counselors:

ERI Website: https://EqualRightsInstitute.com

ERI Blog: https://Blog.EqualRightsInstitute.com

Equipped for Life Course: https://EquippedCourse.com

Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass: http://SidewalkCounselingMasterclass.com

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post How Men Can Serve Fathers in Pregnancy Centers (with Care Net’s Gary Freeman) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:44:19

Content warning: This conversation necessarily includes some thought experiments that relate to sexual abuse, as well as the real-world example of Jeffrey Epstein. As usual, the discussion isn’t graphic, but we want our listeners who are survivors of sexual assault to know that and make an informed decision of whether they want to listen to this episode or not.

It’s Rachel’s last episode! She and Josh discuss how pro-choice people are often inclined to believe that adult women should be prioritized over fetal humans because adults have thoughts, dreams, and relationships. They offer some talking points for pro-lifers including some thought experiments that might help the conversation become more productive. Josh also tells a story about a related dialogue he had with a philosophy professor about prison reform, and how pro-life advocates tend to be primarily motivated by different things, especially when they first become passionate about this issue.

Related Links:

• Josh references several thought experiments from Dr. Francis Beckwith’s great book, “Defending Life: A Moral and Legal Case Against Abortion Choice.” Use this link to purchase the book from Amazon and ERI will receive a small percentage of your purchase, at no cost to you: https://amzn.to/3hZQz09
• Netflix: “Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich”: https://www.netflix.com/title/8022490…
• Secular Pro-Life: The unlikely story of the pro-life author of “Reconsidering Fetal Pain”: https://bit.ly/2Dvimqz
• Evaluating Don Marquis’ Future of Value Argument: http://bit.ly/2NJsrSO
• There are links to Rachel’s best work here: https://bit.ly/39kf4lw
• Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post The Immorality of Harming an Unaware Victim appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:54:04

Transcript PDF

Josh and Rachel discuss the common pro-choice phrase, “consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy” in greater detail than we covered in our recent video on the “Abortion as Self-Defense” argument. There is a version of this argument that is so strong, Rachel says she would use it if she were pro-choice! There are both strong pro-life responses to that argument, and there are also some really cringey ones, and we want to help you avoid the bad ones so you can change more minds!

Related Links:

To see a shorter and more shareable video refuting this argument, click here:
https://youtu.be/ynPtsK9r0ks

Watch the full “Abortion as Self-Defense” video here:
https://youtu.be/B2TakKSUawA

More resources on responding to bodily rights arguments:
https://EqualRightsInstitute.com/BodilyRights

“Consensual Pregnancy: The Moral Permissibility of Abortion” by Maya-Frost Belansky:
(PDF)

Secular Pro-Life: “No, I Am Not Interested In “Punishing” Women for Having Sex”:

Texas Trial Lawyers Association: “McDonalds’ Hot Coffee Case – Read the Facts NOT the Fiction”:

Sophie Lewis Interview:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMGptJXz618

Blood Donation and Bodily Rights Arguments:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmBrUcpOxDw

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post Is Consent to Sex Consent to Pregnancy? appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Related Links

• Source for the “Rape accounts for roughly 1% of abortions” stat: Alan Guttmacher Institute: “Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives.” See tables 2 and 3. https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/defa…
• Josh Brahm: The Best Way to Expose Logical Fallacies: Don’t Call Them by Name http://bit.ly/2ikWwed
• Get the Common Ground Without Compromise Book: https://bit.ly/2E7mEEq
• Responding to the Question of Rape with Wisdom and Compassion: http://bit.ly/2w2JW5q
• Ben Shapiro’s Response to Abortion in the Case of Rape: http://bit.ly/2r1zQzG
• Video: Why I Hate Responding to the Question of Rape https://youtu.be/HFGaLSpIZ3o
• Relating to Relativists http://bit.ly/2ymoNsr
• Effectively Responding to Moral Relativism http://bit.ly/2gsqidj
• Will Smith’s Indefensible Moral Relativism http://bit.ly/2GAgRmv

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post Why Do They Always Ask About Rape? appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:47:40

Josh Brahm and Rachel Crawford dive deeper into the pro-choice argument regarding back-alley abortions than we ever have before on ERI. Topics include understanding why this argument is particularly persuasive to pro-choice people, the most persuasive responses, several bad pro-life responses, and how some pro-abortion-choice advocates lied about this before Roe vs. Wade.

Topics:

• 1:55: Understanding why this argument comes up more now than it used to;
• 4:00: Understanding why this argument is particularly persuasive to pro-choice people;
• 5:31: How this argument was heavily emphasized in Rachel’s Women’s Studies classes;
• 8:52: How Josh’s speaking trip in Trinidad (where abortion is illegal) affected him on this issue;
• 12:24: A weaker version of this argument;
• 15:27: Pro-life people should never start with this counter-argument;
• 22:53: Instead pro-life advocates should make these arguments;
• 31:19: Pro-abortion-choice sources debunk their own statistics;
• 38:19: Responding to people who are skeptical of Dr. Nathanson’s confession;
• 41:53: Two unhelpful pro-life counter-arguments.

A good question to ask:

Do you think like I do, that abortion is an unjust act of violence against an innocent person? If you don’t, that’s okay and we should talk about that. But I do, and so it affects the way I think about these questions. Can you think of one other example where we should keep an unjust act of violence legal to make it safer for a perpetrator to do it anyway?

 

Mary Anne Warren:

The fact that restricting access to abortion has tragic side effects does not, in itself, show that restrictions are unjustified, since murder is wrong regardless of the consequences of prohibiting it.

Source: “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion,” in The Problem of Abortion, Joel Feinberg, et al, Wadsworth, 1984, p.103

Mary Calderone:

Abortion is no longer a dangerous procedure. This applies not just to therapeutic abortions as performed in hospitals but also to so-called illegal abortions as done by physicians . . . Second, and even more important, the conference estimated that 90 per cent of all illegal abortions are presently being done by physicians, trained as such; and many of them are in good standing in their communities. They must do a pretty good job if the death rate is as low as it is.

Source: “Illegal Abortion as a Public Health Problem,” American Journal of Health 50 (July I960): 949

Afred Kinsey source: Cincinnati, Ohio: Hayes Publishing Co, 1988), 169.

Dr. Bernard Nathanson:

It was always ‘5,000 to 10,000 deaths a year,’ I confess that I knew the figures were totally false, and I suppose the 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? The overriding concern was to get the laws [against abortion] eliminated, and anything within reason that had to be done was permissible.

Source: Aborting America, New York, Doubleday, 1979, 193

Dr. Christopher Tietze, chief statistician for, among others, Planned Parenthood and the CDC at the time:

Some 30 years ago it was judged that [illegal abortion] deaths might number 5,000 to 10,000 per year, but this rate, even if it was approximately correct at the time, cannot be anywhere near the true rate now. The total number of deaths from ALL causes among women of reproductive age in the U.S. is not more than about 50,000 per year. The National Center for Health Statistics listed 235 deaths from abortion in 1965. Total mortality from illegal abortions was undoubtedly larger than that figure, but in all likelihood it was under 1,000.

Source: Scientific America, volume 220 in 1969

Related Links:

We referenced a graphic image of Gerri Santoro’s body, who died because of an illegal abortion in 1964. Then picture is circulated in textbooks today, and it was also published in Ms. Magazine in 1973. Here’s a link to the Wikipedia article about her, that includes the famous picture. Graphic picture warning, both for blood and for nudity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerri_Santoro

Abortion Images: A Case for Disagreement without Division

Podcast: Should Women be Punished if Abortion Becomes Illegal?

Podcast: Response to Pro-Choice Propaganda

Bodily Rights Arguments Necessitate Extremism

Is Abortion 14 Times Safer Than Childbirth?

• Video: https://youtu.be/LI7Zdggb8kY
• Article: https://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com/is-abortion-14-times-safer-than-childbirth/

Fetus Tunnel Vision: 4 Reasons Pro-Lifers Need to Stop Doing This

Back Alley Abortion Arguments in 5 Minutes:

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post Responding to “Back-Alley” Abortion Arguments appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:40:02

Josh, Rachel, and Elijah Thompson from Dank Pro-Life Memes discuss the various ways pro-life advocates tend to define the word “abortion,” and how this can be confusing to pro-choice people. They also talk about tips for responding to life of the mother cases, and explain how some pro-choice advocates mean something completely different than we think when they ask about that.

Related Links:

• “Abortion is Healthcare”: A Misogynistic Non-Argument

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post Defining the Word “Abortion” Will Change Your Dialogues (with Dank Pro-Life Memes) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 01:08:49

Josh and Rachel interview Elijah Thompson from Dank Pro-Life Memes to compare and contrast his messaging with ERI’s. Topics include the potential value of snark, whether it’s possible to make memes that aren’t strawmen, whether Dank Pro-Life Memes feeds people’s vice, and Elijah even responds to a question from a pro-choice follower who is critical of Dank Pro-Life Meme’s work.

• 00:00: Introducing Elijah Thomson.
• 2:52: The history and goals of Dank Pro-Life Memes.
• 7:06: How mocking and snark affects DPLM’s goals
• 18:38: Can a meme be made that isn’t a strawman argument?
• 25:49: The time and place for snark.
• 33:01: Elijah responds to a critic of Dank Pro-Life Memes.
• 43:19: Are you feeding people’s vice by mocking stupid arguments?
• 59:07: Renee asks “Why don’t you call out bad pro-lifers more?”
• 1:06:01: On that burning IVF lab…

We reference bodily rights arguments and “the Violinist” in this episode, but we didn’t explain what we meant by that. Learn more about this category of pro-choice arguments here: https://EqualRightsInstitute.com/BodilyRights

Related Links:

• Dank Pro-Life Meme’s Facebook Page
• The Fetal Position Podcast
• John Oliver’s Lies about Abby Johnson and Crisis Pregnancy Centers
• “Abortion is Healthcare”: A Misogynistic Non-Argument
• Video: “How do you respond to infighting over strategy and other things within the pro-life movement?”
• Four Practical Tips for Responding to the Burning Fertility Clinic
• Fetal Position Episode 42: The Burning IVF Lab Analogy

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post Should Pro-Lifers be Snarky? (with Dank Pro-Life Memes) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

You’ve likely heard about the documentary that premiered on FX, AKA Jane Roe, claiming to offer the true story of Norma McCorvey, the “Jane Roe” in Roe v. Wade. Pro-life and pro-choice people are interested in this story, regardless of how relevant it actually is (or should be) to our beliefs about abortion. Even if it feels off-topic, we need to be prepared to talk about this, and shifting to another topic too quickly will likely hurt your conversations about abortion.

I’m explaining our main thoughts below but feel free to use these links if you’d prefer to watch or listen to our discussion on the documentary that covers all of the points below, albeit in more detail.

Why does this matter, especially if our views on abortion shouldn’t be influenced by whether Roe was pro-choice or pro-life? The question this documentary poses isn’t what people should believe about abortion, but rather whether the pro-life movement is corrupt. We then need to answer whether it contains an accurate depiction of the modern pro-life movement.

It would be convenient if this film was deceptively edited to the point that we didn’t need to seriously consider its claims (like the editing practices Josh covered in his videos about Netflix’s “Reversing Roe”), but that doesn’t seem to be the case. Certainly, the movie is incredibly biased, and there’s some evidence that the filmmaker lied about his bias in order to gain access to McCorvey. Still, the underhandedness on display doesn’t invalidate all of the claims presented in AKA Jane Roe, and it seems most plausible that what Norma said in the movie was, at least to a large degree, representative of how she felt.

Again, we don’t agree with the sentiment in some pro-life tweets that we don’t need to pay attention to this documentary because of its pro-choice bias. If that were true, we shouldn’t expect pro-choice people to pay attention to pro-life films such as Unplanned or Gosnell, since they are biased in favor of the pro-life side (and while we believe that bias to be true, it is a bias all the same).

There were a couple major examples of bias. First, and most crucially, the pro-life movement is painted as almost inherently violent through B-roll of actual anti-abortion violence and the description of protestors as “terrorists” by a pro-abortion worker. While “domestic terrorism” is an appropriate term to describe acts of violence against abortion workers and their facilities, it is certainly not a fair representation of how pro-life people are, or even how they were then on the whole; peaceful sidewalk counseling has outgrown protests and demonstrations, and the pro-life movement is committed to non-violence. That said, the inclusion of the buckshot fired at Norma’s door is completely fair, since that would be a major part of anyone’s life story, and the ostensible goal of the movie was to tell her story.

The inclusion of only one pro-life group (Operation Rescue) also lets the filmmakers color the portrayal of the pro-life movement by pretending that one particularly extreme part of it represents the whole. Because McCorvey had significant involvement with the group, it makes sense for them to feature prominently, but it was also very convenient for the desired narrative to minimize Norma’s connection to other groups or to omit situating Operation Rescue within the pro-life movement as a whole.

On the other hand, when it came to Norma’s many controversial statements in the documentary, Josh couldn’t find any evidence of deceptive editing. The quotes were taken from multiple interview days in various locations (even if some were prompted by leading questions). Frank Pavone, head of Priests for Life, who was shown briefly in the film, commented that “[e]verything she said, I have heard her say before.” It is plausible that any quotes tending toward views that would be considered pro-life were left on the cutting room floor, but we don’t have reason at this point to doubt the reality of the quotes that made it into the film.

Given this, what’s the most plausible explanation of what McCorvey actually believed? After all, she asserted multiple contradictory or seemingly contradictory things to many people in public and private over the course of 30-plus years. In order to answer that, we need to look at two plausible motivations for why someone would say something in public that they don’t really mean: financial and emotional (attention/acceptance/fame). We think that both likely applied for Norma, each to a different extent.

It’s true that Norma made money as a pro-life activist (it’s unclear from the documentary whether she was compensated during her pro-choice media blitz). The movie tried to aggregate a $500k figure for her non-profit’s income as if it was brought in over a few years, but it seems to have come in over a much longer time period, and as far as we can tell from looking at the three 990’s available on Guidestar, Norma drew a salary between $11-$26k each year—hardly an outrageous amount. Similarly, it attempts to paint the “benevolence gifts” as under-the-table bribes, but donations between non-profits and speaking fees/honoraria are commonplace throughout the non-profit world. (And if drawing a salary as an activist makes you untrustworthy, then why are you reading this article? We’d be untrustworthy by that rule, since we’re supported by many churches and individuals so we can devote ourselves to pro-life work.)

Of course, this cuts both ways. If money makes her untrustworthy, then we shouldn’t believe what she said in the documentary or as an activist, because she received compensation for cooperating with both. (The documentary director claims that he didn’t pay McCorvey for the interview but that he did pay to license her pictures. We’re guessing that was a distinction without a difference to her.) On the other hand, if we think it’s silly to say she was “bought off” by a meager salary as a pro-life speaker, then we shouldn’t dismiss McCorvey’s claims in the movie because she received compensation for participating).

While money likely played some part, it seems probable that the acceptance and acclaim Norma received when she switched to the pro-life side provides more of an explanation for why she was willing to say things she didn’t necessarily agree with, especially given the context of her traumatic background. For the most part, the pro-choice people ignored her except as a bare symbol (a “trophy”, if you will). They didn’t want her to speak, and they were quick to feel like she was betraying women when she left their ranks. The pro-life people, who were initially overtly hostile to her, were willing to hang on every word when she became “one of them.” She was offered the opportunity to speak, to be famous, and to receive adulation, even during unpaid events. Indeed, this provides a more realistic answer for why Norma would participate in prayer vigils and other pro-life activities with no stipend forthcoming. Pro-life people were understandably excited for her, specifically, to be there.

Especially important to Norma was the offer of acceptance in Jesus Christ. Even though she abused substances, spoke crass language, and probably never adopted the pro-life position fully, she seemed to genuinely profess faith in Christ. To this end, the documentary shows that Norma ceased intimate relations with her female partner, believing that such was contrary to the faith she had accepted, which was no small thing for her to do (whether or not you agree with it).

But even as a pro-life speaker, she didn’t follow the pro-life line. She, more or less openly, supported the availability of first-trimester abortions, even if she had personal reservations. She seemed to do genuine work to overturn Roe, but sometimes stated that her change in stance was for herself (as opposed to what you might expect: saying it was for the babies). And even people who knew this considered her to be “pro-life.”

It’s here that our simplistic labels fail us. What does it mean to be “pro-life?” Is it that you support efforts to overturn Roe? Is it that you wouldn’t personally get an abortion? Is it that you believe that human life should be protected by right from conception, meaning unjustified taking of that life is a grave evil? There’s good evidence that, by the first possible definition, McCorvey was pro-life; but that doesn’t seem like the right definition. Rather, she seems a paradigmatic example of the classic pro-choice position: she supported reforming and restraining abortions, but believed they should be available for others in at least some circumstances.

If Norma was “personally pro-life” and functionally pro-choice, how could she have functioned as a pro-life speaker for so long? She simply acted more pro-life than she was, because she and the pro-life people could support a common goal (overturning Roe). People in the pro-life movement who knew her views were willing to keep quiet because she brought media firepower to their efforts, and she was willing to say more than she believed because the pro-life people met her needs in a way that the pro-choice people didn’t (if this documentary is to be believed at all). She likely became less pro-choice after her conversion to Christianity, but never became truly pro-life.

We think most pro-life people who heard McCorvey’s story truly believed that she was completely pro-life based on the speeches she gave, and the fact that she was welcomed into the movement with so much love and acceptance says something beautiful about our movement. Some of you reading this truly showed the love of Christ to her, and she was much better off for it.

Note: We have to pick an “author” on each post but the content here is really a team effort of primarily Rachel Crawford, Andrew Kaake, and myself.

The post Our Take on the “AKA Jane Roe” Documentary appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 01:03:10

After the entire ERI staff watched the “AKA Jane Roe” documentary, we processed our thoughts together and in this nearly unedited discussion, Josh and Rachel offer their analysis of the film, including:

• Why this story is relevant to pro-choice people and shouldn’t be brushed away by pro-life advocates.
• A video editor’s take on whether the documentary was deceptively edited or merely biased.
• Why getting paid speaking fees or through “benevolence gifts” doesn’t prove that your statements are entirely insincere.
• How the labels “pro-life” and “pro-choice” are adding confusion to this particular discussion.
• What we believe is the most plausible explanation for Norma McCorvey’s statements in the documentary.
• Considering several alternative explanations and why they seem less plausible to us.
• Responding to some of the other pro-life and pro-choice reactions to the documentary.
• A few lessons that pro-life advocates should take from this situation.

“AKA Jane Roe” can now be seen on Hulu.

Related Links:

• Josh’s analysis of a different pro-choice documentary that was very deceptively edited
• The 1995 Nightline interview Norma McCorvey did shortly after her conversion that we reference several times
• We reference multiple of Fr. Pavone’s tweets, especially these two:

  and

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post Our Take on the “AKA Jane Roe” Documentary appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 01:25:02

Josh Brahm interviews Isaac Saul, political journalist and founder of Tangle, an independent, ad-free, non-partisan politics newsletter that offers both sides of the biggest news stories every day.

They start by discussing Isaac’s background and the experiences that led him to attempt to create a truly non-partisan, fair, political newsletter. They then talk about common problems in the media, how to avoid confirmation bias, and how easy it is to fall into the game of snarky tweets, including Isaac admitting that he had published a snarky tweet from his personal account that morning, which they then analyze. Finally Josh asks Isaac for a list of his favorite sources from both sides of the political aisle for people who want to subscribe to at least one source from the opposite side.

Subscribe to Tangle:
https://tangle.substack.com/about

ERI Video: “Should We Be Open-Minded About Abortion?”
https://youtu.be/ovxAxJUyZA4

Isaac Saul: “You’re Not Agnostic, You’re An Atheist”

Karol Markowicz piece on Andrew Cuomo that Isaac referenced:
“Andrew Cuomo owes a genuine back-to-work plan to New Yorkers”

Isaac Saul’s favorite sources from both sides:

David French:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/DavidAFrench
Author page:

Jonah Goldberg:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/JonahDispatch
Author page:

Noah Rothman:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/noahcrothman
Author page:

Coleman Hughes:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/coldxman
Author page:

We the Fifth/The Fifth Column:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/wethefifth
Podcast: https://wethefifth.com/

Karol Markowicz:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/karol
Author page:

Matt Fuller:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/MEPFuller
Author page:

David Brooks:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/nytdavidbrooks
Author page: https://nyti.ms/2YKurjD

Adam Serwer:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AdamSerwer
Author page:

Mehdi Hasan
Twitter: https://twitter.com/mehdirhasan
Author page: https://bit.ly/35IkggW

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post One Easy Step to Avoiding Confirmation Bias: Interview with Tangle Founder Isaac Saul appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:43:20

Rachel Crawford interviews Jacob Nels from ERI’s Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass. Topics include: – Should sidewalk counselors talk about adoption with abortion-minded women? – How to accurately keep track of lives saved vs. “hopefuls”; – How there are no silver bullets or “perfect words” that work for everybody.

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post Why Sidewalk Counselors Should Not Recommend Adoption appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:31:23

Josh and Rachel discuss a new outreach table question that the ERI team tested during a college visit in South Carolina.

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post Podcast: How College Students Responded to Questions About 3rd-Trimester Abortions appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:35:30

During Josh’s speaking trip in Ireland, he sat down with Ben Conroy and Muireann Lynch from The Minimise Project, an awesome young pro-life organization. They talk about how abortion recently became legal in Ireland, dealing with different factions of the pro-life movement, and an awesome story about using the Equal Rights Argument to stump a bunch of students. Excuse the lower than usual audio quality. We did our best with borrowed equipment in a borrowed room. :)

Related Links:

Read The Minimize Project’s blog.

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post The Minimise Project on the Pro-Life Movement in Ireland appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:55:01

You can download the speech audio above or listen to it on your phone by subscribing to the Equal Rights Institute Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

Questions:

• 0:00: How would you respond to someone who counters your argument about freedom of conscience for physicians by saying that doctors are in an occupation where they can’t opt out for personal reasons, just like ambulance drivers can’t decide not to help someone with a swastika tattoo?

• 3:04: What about doctors being obligated to refer women to abortion practitioners?

• 6:05: How should we respond to people who wonder how we would manage a pregnant woman who is suicidal over her pregnancy?

• 9:14: How do you respond to people who say that you should be able to kill people if they’re using your body?

• 17:36: What is a good approach to pro-life protesting, especially given that our abortions happen in hospitals?

• 29:22: Do you think displays of white crosses are a good idea?

• 31:46: How does the dynamic change if you’re debating in front of an audience or in a TV studio?

• 36:44: Dealing with relativists who happily contradict themselves, even saying 1+1 can equal 3, and people who admit the unborn is a human but say that human rights should begin later.

Related Links:

• Jordan Peterson / Cathy Newman debate
• William Lane Craig vs. Christopher Hitchens debate
• Survey of biologists Josh referenced
• LIVE SPEECH AUDIO: What the Pro-Life Movement in Ireland Needs to Know in 2020

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post LIVE SPEECH AUDIO: Q&A in Ireland appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:26:16

You can download the speech audio above or listen to it on your phone by subscribing to the Equal Rights Institute Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

Related Links:

• Equipped for Life Course
• Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass
• Purchase ERI outreach brochures
• ERI Update Video January 2020 (with more explanation of what Josh was doing in Ireland)

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post LIVE SPEECH AUDIO: What the Pro-Life Movement in Ireland Needs to Know in 2020 appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:53:06

Josh and Rachel look at a research article published by the Association for Psychological Science (APS) in 2019,  Perspective Taking and Self-Persuasion: Why “Putting Yourself in Their Shoes” Reduces Openness to Attitude Change, and discuss how it should influence the way we make pro-life arguments.

Shownotes:

• 4:00 Summarizing the research
• 15:16 How ERI develops new apologetics arguments.
• 28:33 Personality research from Jordan Peterson points to reasons behind political disagreement.
• 37:45 Does perspective-taking help with empathy but not creating arguments?
• 42:46 Shared values help to move persuasion forward.

Related Links:

• Stanford Business article about the study:
• https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/why-putting-yourself-their-shoes-might-backfire?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=stripes&utm_content=06132019&fbclid=IwAR1gJOnOhwf2vLSzaXlql–Rbds4YF-ImvxR8qfyfVwcBKqXKnWEyuyHXmg
• “Perspective Taking and Self-Persuasion: Why “Putting Yourself in Their Shoes” Reduces Openness to Attitude Change”:
• https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797618822697

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post What New Research Tells Us About Persuasion appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Questions: (mock debate)

• 1:51: Who are you to say what a woman has a right to do with her own body?
• 2:56: But isn’t it ‘her body, her choice’?
• 3:22: Even if the fetus may be a person, it is not viable, or won’t be for some time.
• 4:19: What if the baby is born with severe mental or physical defects?
• 5:30: Isn’t it wrong for you to insist that a woman deliver a baby that she cannot take care of?
• 6:43: Is it compassionate to force a woman who has been violently raped to be reminded of the assault every day for at least 9 months?
• 8:40: Aren’t most of your arguments based on religion?
• 9:45: Would you force a woman whose life is at risk with this pregnancy to continue?
• 10:59: Isn’t the pro-life position a slippery slope that could end with a negative view of even birth control?
• 12:30: Aren’t you a conservative? Wouldn’t this be government overreach to ban abortion?
• 13:43: Doesn’t pro-life legislation infringe on the right to privacy?
• 14:29: Aren’t your arguments patriarchal and sexist?
• 15:52: Isn’t comparing abortion to genocide an overreach?

Related Links:

• ERI Bodily Rights Materials
• ERI Blog: Responding to the Question of Rape with Wisdom and Compassion
• ERI Video: Why I Hate Responding to the Question of Rape
• ERI Blog: 6 Resources on Whether or Not Birth Control Pills Cause Abortions

The post MOCK DEBATE: Who Are You to Say What a Woman Can’t Do with Her Own Body? appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Questions:

• 1:35: How did you get involved in this?
• 7:05: What are some of the things your team has been learning about persuading people?
• 17:42: How do you get the opportunity to go on college campuses and have discussions about abortion?
• 19:12: Are you comfortable doing debates?
• 20:31: Why relational apologetics?

Related Links:

• Relational apologetics articles on the ERI blog

The post INTERVIEW: Why Create Another Pro-Life Group? appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Questions:

• 2:26: Why should we avoid discussing abortion on social media? Or should we?
• 7:53: Is it a bad idea to even respond when you see one of your friends on Facebook that may put something up that is against our beliefs? (Is it our responsibility?)
• 11:21: Is it better to have no restrictions on abortion rather than legislation with some restrictions but many exceptions?
• 15:10 Is it right to use a candidate’s position on abortion as a litmus test as to whether or not you would support them politically?
• 16:37: Should you talk about abortion in church?
• 20:02: Is it right to give money to organizations that, while they do some good, support abortion providers like Planned Parenthood?

Related Links:

• ERI Blog: Learning to Allow Space for the Thinking Pause
• Relational apologetics articles on the ERI blog

The post INTERVIEW: Discussing Abortion in a Social Media World appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 01:05:08

On October 1st, 2019 the city of Jackson, Mississippi passed a buffer-zone law prohibiting free speech near healthcare facilities, which includes the last remaining abortion facility in the state of Mississippi. By looking at the events leading up to this ordinance being passed, pro-life advocates can learn to make better strategic decisions to prevent buffer-zone laws from being passed in their city. Some pro-lifers argue that buffer-zones are unconstitutional, but whether or not this ordinance is eventually upheld (like Hill v Colorado was in 2000) or dismissed, it is undeniably a devastating blow to sidewalk counseling in Mississippi as well as throughout the country.

For more information:

Consent Decree Pro-life Mississippi v Horton 2016:
http://bit.ly/2IkFnLS

City Council Meeting Sept. 26th, see item 8:
http://bit.ly/34ZjN9H

Hill v. Colorado Supreme Court decision:
http://bit.ly/2V8Y0YB

News report from MSN:
http://bit.ly/30JuXf2

News report from the Guardian:
http://bit.ly/2M5ugYo

Clinic escort group Facebook page:
http://bit.ly/2Og16IF

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post Podcast: Learn from Mississippi’s Mistakes: How to Prevent Buffer-Zone Laws appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:24:37

Rachel Crawford and I discuss the abortion episode in the third season of “13 Reasons Why,” how it misrepresents the pro-life movement, and what pro-life people ought to say when they hear people bring it up.

Related Links:

• Blog Article: “Sometimes It’s Not about the Argument”
• Preorder the Sidewalk Counseling Masterclass

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: How Should Pro-Life Advocates Talk about That “13 Reasons Why” Abortion Episode? appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Questions:

• 2:20: What made you decide to try a different approach to this issue than many had before?
• 7:03: What arguments and dialogue techniques do not work? What is it that we often do that doesn’t change minds?
• 10:06: What works more frequently than some of the other things?
• 14:45: How do you get into these conversations?
• 16:50: I hear a lot of questions in your approach. People often start with declarative statements. Why do questions work better?
• 18:41: People on both sides of this issue tend to talk about extreme cases like rape or sex-selection abortions. How do we keep the conversation focused on core principles?

Related Links:

• Abortion Images: A Case for Disagreement without Division

The post INTERVIEW: How To Start Pro-Life Conversations the Right Way appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:22:01

I give an update on what’s been going on behind the scenes at the ERI office, regarding recent speaking trips, making the video series analyzing “Reversing Roe,” and an update on the sidewalk counseling course.

Related Links:

• Click here to watch my video series Reversing Roe: Exposing the Bias
• Click here to donate to Equal Rights Institute
• Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes.

The post ERI Update – November 2018 appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In November of 2017 the Holy Family Respect Life Committee, in conjunction with Charles County Right to Life, invited Josh Brahm and David Bereit to speak at their annual pro-life conference in Southern Maryland.

After the keynote sessions, Josh and David did a panel discussion and Q&A, joined by Michele Hendrickson, Capital Area Regional Director for Students for Life of America and Heather Sells, CEO of the Catherine Foundation, a local Pregnancy Resource Center. The panel discussion was hosted by Ali Rak from the Southern Maryland Pro-Life Symposium.

Prefer listening on your phone? You can easily download the whole conference by subscribing to the ERI Podcast in the iTunes Podcast app on your phone.

Josh Brahm Keynote

Download Audio MP3 | 00:50:23

Josh shares seven practical dialogue tips (including two that he’s never taught before!) as well as explaining how to use the Equal Rights Argument to change minds about abortion.

David Bereit Keynote

Download Audio MP3 | 00:47:48

David shares the story of how he got involved in the pro-life movement in spite of being an unlikely activist and encourages the audience to become more active in the pro-life movement, including practical advice on how to find your pro-life lane and get plugged in.

Panel Discussion and Q&A Session

Download Audio MP3 | 01:33:34

Apologies for occasional audio issues in the panel discussion. They used tabletop panel discussion mics and when Heather would turn her head away from the mic sometimes her mic sort of cuts out. We’ve made some edits where possible, and you can always get the gist of what she’s saying.

• 1:29: From your standpoint, what does the pro-life movement need to do to become more effective?
• 16:00: What should pro-life advocates avoid and what hurts our cause the most?
• 31:00: What is access to abortion like in Southern Maryland? Where does a woman who is abortion-minded go to terminate a pregnancy? How many of them tend to go to the local Pregnancy Resource Centers? Paint a picture of what it’s like to be in crisis in Southern Maryland.
• 35:49: What does counseling an abortion-minded woman look like in your Pregnancy Resource Center as opposed to sidewalk counseling where you often only have a moment to start that conversation?
• 43:39: How are college and high school students shaping the pro-life movement? How do we get more youth involved, and why should there be a Students for Life club at every school in the country?
• 51:26: Josh, as a “connoisseur of good arguments and gracious conversation,” how can pro-lifers use Facebook and social media as a force for good?
• 56:06: How do we build the pro-life community locally, one that is engaged and motivated toward action, rather than just being pro-life?
• 1:04:53: Can we learn anything from the effectiveness of the gay marriage movement that we can apply to our movement?
• 1:09:55: It seems like there is so much emphasis these days on individual rights, where for some people, even if they personally feel like abortion is wrong, they don’t feel like it’s their place to speak out against abortion because they don’t want to offend someone. How do you get beyond that?
• 1:13:10: You said that you don’t approach this issue from a religious standpoint, and I’m struggling with the idea of stopping at the concept of equal rights because I think equal rights come from a religious standpoint. I’m assuming you talk to lots of college students who don’t believe in equal rights. How do you deal with that without getting into the religious aspect that we’re created in God’s image and not a product of evolution?
• 1:19:32: Josh, you mentioned utilitarianism. Can you explain what that is and how it might come up in abortion conversations?
• 1:21:33: I was really struck by a statistic that was shared about one in four women in church having had an abortion. How can we effectively express that graphic imagery and very strongly worded signs almost create a PTSD kind of moment for a lot of women who have made a very difficult decision in their lives, and would like to be involved in the pro-life movement, but can’t abide by being in that presence? How do we overcome that obstacle?

Related Links:

• Timothy Brahm for the ERI Blog: Abortion Images: A Case for Disagreement without Division.
• Live Speech Audio from Timothy Brahm: Using Digital Media to Save Lives.
• Josh Brahm for the ERI Blog: Understanding What Richard Dawkins Actually Believes About Abortion and Down Syndrome.
• Josh Brahm for the ERI Blog: Richard Dawkins Retweeted My Article, and What We Can Learn From That.
• Amazon: Blueprint for Revolution.
• Amazon: After the Ball.
• For more on utilitarianism, read Timothy Brahm’s recent article, Thanos Would Be Pro-Choice.

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post LIVE SPEECH AUDIO: Keynotes and Panel Q&A with Josh Brahm & David Bereit appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:30:57

I recently sat in the conference room in our new office to give you an update on what’s been going on behind the scenes at Equal Rights Institute:

• 01:41 – Sidewalk Counseling Course production update;
• 02:58 – Why following us on Facebook and Twitter will help us publish books;
• 07:18 – Introduction to my project to help pastors prevent abortions in their churches.

Related Links:

• Photo Album: Equal Rights Institute Turns Four
• Information about Josh’s upcoming speaking events in Ohio and Berkeley
• Click here to like us on Facebook
• Click here to follow us on Twitter
• Article: One Thing Every Pastor Can Do to Prevent Abortions in Their Congregation
• Pastor Pledge Landing Page
• Click here to donate to Equal Rights Institute
• Contact Us form
• Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes.

The post ERI Update – July 2018 appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:05:39

Timothy Brahm explains how now more than ever, pro-choice advocates are turning to the back alley abortion argument. Watch this video to learn how to respond graciously and persuasively.

Related Links:

• Audio Blog: Bodily Rights Arguments Necessitate Extremism
• Blog Article: Bodily Rights Arguments Necessitate Extremism
• Click here to follow Timothy on Twitter.
• Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Back Alley Abortion Arguments in 5 Minutes appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:06:17

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Josh Brahm Explains Some Changes to Our Podcast appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:12:52

When the first Women’s March happened in 2017, I was a senior in College. I was taking women’s studies classes, so I was surrounded by people who were promoting, organizing, and going to the Women’s March. I felt immersed in that culture, and it was a really interesting experience for me.

This post, inspired by that experience, takes that Women’s March and pro-choice activism and looks at what pro-life advocates can learn from what they did right and discusses what we should do differently.

Related Links:

• Click here for the Washington Post article about the Women’s March removing New Wave Feminists from the list of official sponsors
• Click here for the list of Women’s March partners and sponsors
• Josh Brahm: Fetus Tunnel Vision: 4 Reasons Pro-Lifers Need to Stop Doing This

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Five Lessons for Pro-Lifers from the Women’s March appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Rachel interviews Lori Navrodtzke, a Pregnancy Resource Center counselor and Justice For All volunteer, about how to dialogue with people about abortion if they’ve already had one.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:07:50

In this clip, Rachel and Lori discuss how to proceed in a conversation if someone does not admit to having had a personal abortion experience. They also give some examples of how to let people know about post-abortive healing, even if they don’t feel like they need it at this time.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Practical Tips for Talking with Post-Abortive Women appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:32:38

At the 2018 Students for Life of America Conference, Timothy Brahm gave a never-before-heard speech on social media dialogue. After the presentation, Tim answered some questions from the audience along with Josh Tijerina from Halcyon, another social media presenter at the conference who presented before Tim did. Below are listed some of the different points that he makes in the speech, in case you would like to jump around:

Problems with Conversations on Social Media:

• 2:27: When people are in fight mode, they can’t hear you. It is not just about the arguments.
• 3:43: Social media conversations are extra challenging because they are public, not private
• 4:33: Social media breeds hypersensitivity to our own brand management.
• 6:07: The structure of comment threads work against you.
• 7:12: The “like” system influences how causal observers perceive your writing through an unfair filter.
• 8:15: People on social media are almost immune from normal social pressures.
• 10:07: Recent political hostility has conditioned people to be angry online.
• 11:03: Social media is structured as an engine for constant outrage.

16 Tips for Social Media Dialogue:

• 16:08: Move your conversation to private message, Skype, or in person as soon as possible.
• 17:06: Make minimal persuasion goals.
• 18:00: Be aware of the lack of nonverbal communication.
• 18:34: Post things with your pro-choice friends in mind.
• 19:22: Try hard to assume the best about people.
• 19:34: Take a step back if you’re feeling defensive.
• 19:57: Point out every piece of common ground.
• 20:14: Try to only use neutral language.
• 20:31: Ask lots of clarification questions, make few statements and arguments. Try to wait to do so until the conversation is one-on-one.
• 20:48: Choose a friendly looking profile picture.
• 21:17: Don’t name-drop philosophers or logical fallacies.
• 21:36: Don’t feed the trolls.
• 22:08: Use links very sparingly.
• 22:28: Only cite neutral sources. Do not link to pro-life websites.
• 22:36: Point out when they teach you something.
• 23:18: Sow intentional, positive seeds with people who you hope to dialogue with someday.

Q and A with Tim Brahm and the other presenter who spoke before him, Josh Tijerina:

• 25:25: “When is the appropriate time to use snark in dialogues?”
• 26:39: “In regards to your point about liking pro-choice friend’s comments when you think they are being charitable or gracious in dialogue, do you think that could be misinterpreted or come off as strange to your pro-life friends?”
• 28:01: “Have you done any studies on the effectiveness of graphic abortion images on social media?”
• 30:01: “In tip number four, you suggest we post on social media with our pro-choice friends in mind. I am a Christian and this influences my pro-life view, so sometimes I post Christian things or bible verses. What do you think about this?”

Related Links:

• Click here for audio where the ERI team tells stories from the SFLA 2018 Conference.
• Timothy Brahm: On Virtue Signaling
• Timothy Brahm: Don’t Be Too Nice
• Josh Brahm: Don’t Name Logical Fallacies 

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post LIVE SPEECH AUDIO: Using Digital Media to Save Lives appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I finish the six-part series on how to be an effective pro-life advocate on social media. They give 7 more practical tips on argumentation.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:10:51

In these clips, we give 2 tips for how to use sources or research studies in online conversations.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Social Media Dialogue Part 6: 7 Final Practical Tips for Overcoming the Challenges appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:06:10

This is the last in a series of three pieces that I wrote on the topic of fetus tunnel vision. The first piece defines fetus tunnel vision and gives four arguments for why pro-life people should not have it. The second responds to some concerns and complaints about the piece. And this third piece addresses more questions.

Related Links:

• Josh Brahm: Fetus Tunnel Vision: 4 Reasons Pro-Lifers Need to Stop Doing This
• Josh Brahm: Responding to Concerns Regarding My “Fetus Tunnel Vision” Piece
• Click here to watch me lead a discussion about a meme that a friend and colleague of mine distributed right after the Aurora movie theater massacre.

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Responding to More Questions About My “Fetus Tunnel Vision” Piece appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I continue a multi-part series on how to be an effective pro-life advocate on social media. We give 9 more practical tips.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:07:12

In this clip, we discuss the sometimes unseen dynamics at play in a conversation and how this should affect our approach. Especially online, we need to remember that people are watching, whether it is in the public comments or in a private message which may be taken in a screenshot and spread publicly.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Social Media Dialogue Part 5: 9 More Practical Tips for Overcoming the Challenges appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:31:09

I walk around a botanical garden in Denmark and share about what’s been going on behind the scenes at ERI lately:

• 00:00 – What I did in Denmark
• 13:02 – Why I had to completely rework the way we do webinars
• 17:07 – Speaker training for Rachel and her first speaking tour in Oregon and Pennsylvania
• 19:35 – Where we’re at with the big Equipped for Life Course extension and why it’s taking so long
• 22:02 – Why we’re building a video studio instead of renting studio time like we did when we first filmed the course two years ago

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes.

The post ERI Update – April/May 2018 from Denmark! appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:06:29

The previous audio blog, “Fetus Tunnel Vision: 4 Reasons Pro-Lifers Need to Stop Doing This,” was a relatively controversial piece that I wrote about 5 years ago. Some people loved it, some hated it, and some had really good questions. I ended up writing 2 follow-up pieces responding to the concerns and questions I was seeing as I publicly engaged people on this issue. This is the first.

Related Links:

• Josh Brahm: Fetus Tunnel Vision: 4 Reasons Pro-Lifers Need to Stop Doing This
• Click here to purchase The Sex Slave Murders: The True Story of Serial Killers Gerald & Charlene Gallego by R. Barri Flowers
• Timothy Brahm: On Virtue-Signaling

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Responding to Concerns Regarding My “Fetus Tunnel Vision” Piece appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I continue a multi-part series on how to be an effective pro-life advocate on social media. We give 12 more practical tips.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:06:19

In this clip, I introduce an idea from game theory, Rapoport’s rules. I talk about the value of the third rule: recognize when the other person teaches you something.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Social Media Dialogue Part 4: 12 More Practical Tips for Overcoming the Challenges appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:09:59

Here at ERI we like to help pro-life people not be weird. About 5 years ago, a Students for Life staff person reached out to me asking for an example of a weird thing pro-life people do. The first thing that came to my mind was what we call fetus tunnel vision.

This was something I had been thinking about for years. In the first several years after 9/11, every time the anniversary came around I would see a lot of pro-life people posting on social media comparing the number of people who died on 9/11 to the number of babies aborted every day. This article and the following in the series explain why this is a bad idea.

Related Links:

• Click here to watch an interview of a survivor of sex slavery describing the hell of her experience
• Click here to learn about the term “abortion juke”
• Click here to watch me lead a discussion about a meme that a friend and colleague of mine distributed right after the Aurora movie theater massacre
• Click here to listen to Part 2 and a bonus discussion (#155: Is it Wise to Make Comparisons to the Aurora Movie Theater Shooting? – PART 2 and BONUS: Post-Episode Discussion from #154–155)

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Fetus Tunnel Vision: 4 Reasons Pro-Lifers Need to Stop Doing This appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I continue a multi-part series on how to be an effective pro-life advocate on social media. In this episode, we begin a series of 35 practical tips in five categories.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:07:53

In this clip, Tim explains why we should be trying to make minimum persuasion goals when we dialogue on Facebook, and I make a point about posting comments with a lot of text.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Social Media Dialogue Part 3: 7 Practical Tips for Overcoming the Challenges appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:04:31

Many conversations about abortion succeed or fail because of your rapport, or lack thereof, with the pro-choice person. Even a perfectly articulated pro-life argument will just glance off of a combative pro-choice mind, so people who are skilled at dialogue use wisdom to build rapport and make the tone of the conversation friendly.

This piece gives a kind of interesting dialogue tip that has made a huge difference in building rapport in my conversations. I didn’t even notice it was significant until my colleague Rachel pointed it out.

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Building Rapport with a Benevolent Dictator appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I continue a multi-part series on how to be an effective pro-life advocate on social media. Tim discusses virtue-signaling. What is it? Are there different types? Are some of them actually okay? And when is it a valid or helpful accusation?

Download Audio MP3 | 00:08:16

In this clip, Tim explains how the philosophy team has organized the way that we think about different kinds of virtue-signaling.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Social Media Dialogue Part 2: How to Think About Virtue-Signaling appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:05:44

“My body, my choice” is possibly the most common slogan in defense of abortion right now, and an embarrassing number of pro-life people completely misunderstand it. This misunderstanding is so common, and it is so destructive. For me, and the rest of the team at ERI, it is a point of particular frustration. This piece is a response to a particular meme that completely misunderstands bodily rights arguments, and is therefore really harmful to the pro-life cause. Please stop sharing it.

Related Links:

• Timothy Brahm: Autumn in the Sovereign Zone: Why “It’s My Body, I Can Do What I Want” Won’t Do
• Timothy Brahm: Bodily Rights Arguments Necessitate Extremism
• Josh Brahm: Understanding and Responding to Bodily Rights Arguments
• Josh Brahm: Two Bad Pro-Life Responses to Bodily Rights Arguments

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Fellow Pro-Lifers: Please Stop Sharing This Straw Man Meme appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I begin a multi-part series on how to be an effective pro-life advocate on social media. We begin the series by talking about some of the obstacles that often prevent good dialogue from happening on social media, like image management.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:05:35

In this clip, Tim introduces the idea of image management in public conversation online.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Social Media Dialogue Part 1: The Obstacles appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:11:02

Right before we released the Equipped for Life Course, we realized that one of the videos seemed to include Virtue-Signaling. Since Virtue-Signaling is a negative thing, it was rather confusing that this particular instance seemed okay. Finally, after about a year and a half, I gained some clarity and wrote this post.

In this piece, I offer some distinctions between types of Virtue-Signaling with the hope that people will be able to distinguish the objectionable types from the acceptable types. I close with suggestions about how and when to accuse someone of Virtue-Signaling, all with the desired end of helping dialogue to be more productive between parties that disagree.

Related Links:

• Timothy Brahm: How to Turn the Tables on Four Pro-Choice Arguments
• Click here for an explanation of the term “woke”
• Timothy Brahm: How Your Brain Tricks You into Thinking the Other Side Is Stupid
• Timothy Brahm: Snidely Whiplash Is Not on Facebook

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: On Virtue-Signaling appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I respond to questions on double-effect reasoning and how we would respond to someone who is pro-life for the wrong reasons. Afterwards, we talk about how to respond to the Freakonomics argument that abortion has resulted in a drop in crime rates, as well as a new technique I have been using when talking to utilitarians.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:07:52

In this clip, Tim talks about how pro-life advocates should respond if someone brings up the abortion section from the popular book Freakonomics.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Listener Mail: Freakonomics appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:05:11

Even before ERI officially began, Tim and I cared a lot about helping pro-life people to think well and take pro-choice arguments seriously. We don’t think every single pro-choice argument is a good argument (there are a lot of really bad arguments on both sides), but we won’t be persuasive unless we can recognize and take the stronger pro-choice arguments seriously. In this piece, I address two bad pro-life responses to some of the stronger pro-choice arguments.

Related Links:

• Josh Brahm: Understanding and Responding to Bodily Rights Arguments (includes my speech)
• Click here for the Alan Guttmacher Institute’s 2005 survey of more than 1,200 abortion patients
• Timothy Brahm: Autumn in the Sovereign Zone: Why “It’s My Body, I Can Do What I Want” Won’t Do
• Click here for Judith Jarvis Thomson’s violinist story or “people-seeds” analogy

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Two Bad Pro-Life Responses to Bodily Rights Arguments appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I respond to a bunch of listener-mail questions related to the thought experiment about a burning in vitro fertilization lab—particularly the concern that it is too easy for pro-choice people to get traction with strawmen tweets when pro-life people have to answer with longer, more thoughtful responses that fewer people will read.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:09:42

In this clip, the team begins to answer a question about how the pro-life movement is supposed to compete in the world of meme-driven, fast-paced internet culture.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: How Can the Pro-Life Movement Win Against Viral Pro-Choice Tweets? appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:12:32

Sometimes it is tough to be a pro-life college student. Most challenges students face are found on campus during a tabling event or with the administration, but sometimes they are inside the classroom. Far too often when pro-life students dare to speak up in defense of the unborn, professors attempt to humiliate and silence them.

This piece is about two real stories. One of them happened to me, and one of them happened to Ellen, a student we heard from firsthand on Twitter.

Related Links:

• Click here to learn about the Equal Rights Argument

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Abuse of Academic Authority Regularly Inhibits Pro-Life Speech appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I talk about our recent outreach at Davidson College, which was a particularly difficult outreach for Tim and Rachel. They discuss what made it difficult as well as share some practical tips for handling discouragement at an outreach.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:04:40

In these clips, Tim discusses why it is important for volunteers to take breaks at outreach.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Dealing with Discouragement at Outreach appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:12:59

This piece is an outreach dialogue story. Despite my not being excited to write it, it went viral on lifenews.com. We suspect this had to do with the title, which could give the impression that this is one of those “The brilliant pro-life person destroys the stupid pro-choice person” posts.

That’s not an attitude that we want to nourish. We think it’s more intellectually healthy to get outside of your echo chamber and think about the smartest arguments that are coming from the other side. But some people like those kinds of pieces because they feel good. Though I didn’t intend to write a bait-and-switch piece, I think I sort of did, and I’m glad it got some people who otherwise wouldn’t read our blog to learn a little about what we do when we’re trying to create a good dialogue.

Related Links:

• Click here to learn about Right to Life of Central CA
• Click here to learn about Justice for All
• Click here to read Dr. Rich Poupard’s thought experiment
• Timothy Brahm: Autumn in the Sovereign Zone: Why “It’s My Body, I Can Do What I Want” Won’t Do
• Click here for a definition of an ad hominem fallacy
• Click here to learn about Secular Pro-Life
• Josh Brahm: 6 Tips for Arguing with Analogies Clearly
• Click here for a definition of a straw man
• Timothy Brahm: Don’t Be Too Nice

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: The Biology Professor Who Hated Our Outreach Exhibit appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I share how we respond to pro-choice students who ask about life-threatening pregnancies. We also talk through some of the more difficult philosophical issues that sometimes come up when discussing this.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:07:54

In this clip, Rachel shares a sound bite to help you respond to this question, and the team discusses how to begin a response.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: What If the Mother’s Life Is at Risk? appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:09:30

I wrote this piece a few years ago. Someone had asked me a really tough question in an email, so I decided to address the question in a blog post in case others were interested. I addressed the need to respond to this pro-choice objection relationally. To my surprise, it seemed to touch a nerve. For the past 2 years, this piece has been the #1 most-read piece from a previous year on our blog. It certainly seems to be connecting with people.

Related Links:

• Click here to watch a video where I address how to respond to the issue of rape
• Josh Brahm: Responding to the Question of Rape with Wisdom and Compassion
• Click here to learn about 40 Days for Life
• Josh Brahm: Top 5 ERI Articles & Podcasts of 2017

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: What to Say to Someone Who Says “I Wish I Had Been Aborted” appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I sit down to answer one of the most frequent questions about the Equal Rights Argument: “How do you respond to someone who says that you need to be ‘human plus something else,’ like sentience, to have equal rights, given that it seems like that combination gets around the problems in the Zoo Shooting thought experiment?”

Download Audio MP3 | 00:08:15

In this clip, the we introduce this question while Rachel and Tim roleplay an example dialogue to demonstrate how this comes up in conversations.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Listener Mail – Human-Plus Arguments appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:31:47

I give an update on the main things that have been going on at ERI in the last month and what we’re working on next.

• Highlights from Josh’s Canadian speaking tour;
• Rachel is in Charlotte, and we hired Andrew Kaake and John Ferrer;
• Doing a lot of research on A/V equipment for extending the course as well as a new project we’re starting this year;
• Update on course extension we’re going to shoot this year;
• Update on the search for an office.

Click here to subscribe to our email list.

Click here for info on how to move Gmail messages from promotions to primary tab.

Click here for the podcast episode where we discuss highlights from the Students for Life conference.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes.

The post ERI Update – February 2018 appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:14:30

When I was president of Students for Life at the University of Michigan, we tried to do an outreach at least once per month because we felt that once per semester wasn’t quite enough. With that experience and help from the rest of the team, I put together a list of 10 tips that will help student leaders as they prepare for an outreach. Especially if you’re doing this for the first time, you want to prepare for whatever might arise by having a strategic plan and practical supplies.

Related Links:

• Click here for the volunteer agreement ERI uses
• Click here to create a Doodle poll

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: 10 Practical Tips for Leading a Campus Outreach appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I interview Casey Mattox from Alliance Defending Freedom on how students should deal with free speech violations and respond to common arguments from typical leftists defending free speech violations.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:03:09

In this clip, Casey gives advice to students about what to do if people try to silence your outreach event.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Interview with Casey Mattox from Alliance Defending Freedom appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:16:40

If you are a part of a dialogue-oriented outreach, you should be paying attention to who should be in a given conversation, and who should not be. This is one of those advanced practical outreach tips that you just learn by doing outreach a lot and by talking with the rest of your team a lot about different kinds of situations. The idea for this piece came to me as we were debriefing an outreach our staff did at Davidson College here outside of Charlotte, NC.

Related Links:

• Justice for All
• Equal Rights Institute Blog: Relational Apologetics
• Equipped for Life Course Podcast
• Click here for the lore behind the name of “The Vampire Rule”
• Rachel Crawford: 10 Practical Tips for Leading a Campus Outreach

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Pay Attention to Who Should NOT Be in a Given Conversation appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Jacob, and I answer listener mail.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:08:52

In this clip, we respond to a question about the “Rephrase What They Said” lesson in Module 2. How should we respond if they say that they didn’t actually say that, not because we misunderstood, but because they are changing their views during the conversation?

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Listener Mail – Insta-Correcting Views appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:04:45

This is a follow-up piece to my previous audio blog on logical fallacies and the danger of accusing people of fallacies they did not commit. This piece focuses on how to effectively expose logical fallacies that are committed during a dialogue. Because this piece became one of the most popular posts, I began including this practical dialogue tip in a lot of my talks.

Related Links:

• Josh Brahm: You Should Know What a Logical Fallacy Actually Is
• Click here to watch Trent Horn talk about exposing logical fallacies on an episode of Life Report (or download the mp3 here)
• Click here for Greg Koukl’s Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions
• Click here for Justice for All’s “Three Essential Skills”
• Click here for an explanation of post hoc ergo propter hoc

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: The Best Way to Expose Logical Fallacies: Don’t Call Them by Name appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I dissect the confusing video created by actor James Franco as he interviews Princeton professor Elizabeth Harman on her abortion argument. We go on to explain and refute the argument Harman makes in her original paper.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:21:47

In this clip, the team discusses the reaction of the pro-life community after this video was published.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: That James Franco Video appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:06:12

This is a piece that I wrote a few years ago. I was responding to an annoying trend that I had been seeing, at least among pro-life people. We are tempted to talk about fallacies all the time in conversation, but one danger of accusing people of committing a logical fallacy is that you may not actually know what you’re talking about.

Related Links:

• Josh Brahm: You Should Know How to Disagree Well
• Click here for the essay by Paul Graham on different ways to disagree with people, in their order of effectiveness.
• Click here to watch William Lane Craig explain an ad hominem fallacy.

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: You Should Know What a Logical Fallacy Actually Is appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 01:00:30

Tim, Rachel, and I sat down to share some of our favorite stories from the people we talked to at the 2018 Students for Life East Coast Conference. We walked away from that conference glowing, excitedly telling each other stories, because that was one of the most encouraging days we had experienced at ERI. We decided that you should have a chance to listen in on those stories, especially if you’re a financial supporter that made this work, and the amazing results we witnessed, possible.

Related Links:

• Timothy Brahm: On Virtue-Signaling
• JohnBCrist on YouTube: Trying to Play Guess Who in 2018
• Josh Brahm: Why You Shouldn’t Face the Person You’re Talking To
• ERI’s Equipped for Life Course
• ERI Blog: Relational Apologetics articles

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Stories from the Students for Life Conference appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Jacob, and I sit down to respond to 12 listener mail questions about sidewalk counseling.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:09:07

In this clip, Jacob talks about reaching out to women who are being rushed into the door and the importance of learning the names of facility escorts.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Listener Mail – Questions About Sidewalk Counseling appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:10:17

A couple months ago, a series of tweets about abortion went viral. They used the pro-choice argument involving a burning fertility clinic thought experiment. As a pro-life advocate who occasionally gets questions about abortion issues, I received questions about this thought experiment from maybe 20 different individuals.

For some reason, pro-choice people tend to think this argument demolishes the pro-life view, so it’s important to be ready to respond to it efficiently (meaning you need to focus on just a couple of disanalogies, not all of them) and persuasively (meaning you need to convince them that you aren’t just weaseling out of a problem with your view). My focus in this piece is practical dialogue—how to respond to this argument in a way that pro-choice people are most likely to find compelling.

Related Links:

• Click here for the series of tweets that went viral
• Click here to buy Robert George and Christopher Tollefsen’s book Embryo: A Defense of Human Life
• Click here for the article by Robert George

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Four Practical Tips for Responding to the Burning Fertility Clinic appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I answer listener mail.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:04:47

In this clip, I share a question that I received over email from a guy named Jason. He asks how he should respond to a friend who received healthcare from Planned Parenthood regarding legitimate health concerns that she had, including an inverted uterus. Because of that positive experience, she now says that she will always stand by Planned Parenthood.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Listener Mail – Planned Parenthood appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:51:52

I spoke at Stonebridge Church in Charlotte again last November after they finished going through the Equipped for Life Course, to answer their questions.

I’ll list the topics below in case you want to jump around:

• 1:00: “Tell us a little bit about who you are and who ERI is.”
• 3:59: “So you’ve talked about relational apologetics. Let’s say I’m pro-life and I hate conflict. I don’t want to offend people, so I basically end up never talking about my pro-life convictions. I’m pro-life, but I don’t talk about it because it’s a very controversial topic. How do I get over that fear? What do I do?”
• 14:21: “How do we make conversations about abortion more common and less weird?”
• 18:32: “In your opinion, how can we as a pro-life group at a large church, more effectively stir up passion for pro-life advocacy within our walls?”
• 22:59: “How can we have a greater impact in our community? In your experience and convictions, assuming that the foundational call is to love God and our pro-choice neighbor, what do you think are the most effective ways to turn the tide of our culture toward valuing the life of the unborn more?”
• 31:52: “I’m going into professional counseling and have been learning about not imposing values onto clients. So if a client came up to me and said that they want to have an abortion, how should I approach that without imposing my values?”
• 37:14: “If I’m buying a whole lot of baby diapers or something to give to the pregnancy center, and just by chance someone from Walmart or wherever strikes up a conversation, I think I’d probably keep it real short and sweet, but that was an idea that came to me.”
• 39:08: “I didn’t attend the [Equipped for Life] course classes and I don’t want to cheapen your 35-hours of course material, but is there 60-seconds that you could give…?”
• 42:10: “I hear you saying that most pro-choice people believe that an [unborn] baby is a human being, but the woman’s right to choose trumps that.”
• 44:51: “In your opinion, if you were to give a state of the union address on the status of the pro-life movement in America and the culture, what’s the wind of the culture right now when it comes to this? 60-second state of the union address. Where are we culturally? Is abortion going to end in 2017?”

I asked Eric to read the email he sent his friend to initiate a series of conversations about abortion. With Eric’s permission, here is the full text of that, and you can feel free to copy any part of it if it would be helpful to you:

Awhile back I had mentioned the idea of the two of us sitting down to discuss our thoughts about abortion. I’m writing you now to tee that idea back up and hoping that you’ll say yes. I’ve been taking a class that has been geared toward having great conversations with people who think differently about controversial topics, and one of the assignments is to literally have at least one actual conversation with someone about a controversial topic. All too often, people on different “sides” of a topic like abortion spend all their time defending their own view and criticizing opposing views without actually listening to and learning from people who have differing views. I want to be a person who listens and learns. Will you help me do that? I’d like to buy you breakfast, lunch, or just a cup of coffee sometime and learn from your views on this. What do you say?

At one point I talked about the idea that we don’t change people’s minds, but that people change their own minds. I neglected to cite him in the moment, but I owe that insight to Timothy Brahm.

Related Links:

• Click here to learn more about the Equipped for Life Course.
• Pew Research Center: Few Clinton or Trump Supporters Have Close Friends in the Other Camp
• Timothy Brahm for the ERI Blog: How Your Brain Tricks You into Thinking the Other Side Is Stupid – Two Practical Tips for Better Social Media Conversations. (This post has the meme I mentioned.)
• Josh Brahm for the ERI Blog: Can You Explain Why You’re Pro-Life in a 30-Second Sound Bite?

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Live Q&A at Stonebridge Church (2 of 2) appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I continue the conversation on relational apologetics. We explain why to use relational apologetics and give 12 practical tips.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:06:28

In this clip, Rachel discusses why we should share the pro-life vision for the world and why we should talk about more than just debating the issues with friends.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Relational Apologetics – Part 2 appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:10:27

This piece is an unofficial part 3 to the pieces about my conversation with Brent. Those articles ended up touching on the important issue of the role of the right to sex in the argument for abortion. When I came upon an article about Planned Parenthood’s view on whether or not someone has an obligation to disclose HIV to a sexual partner, I saw the connection and thought it was worth pointing out.

Related Links:

• Click here for the DailyWire article about Planned Parenthood’s view
• Click here for International Planned Parenthood Federation’s booklet for teens with HIV
• Timothy Brahm: Is Abortion Justified by an Inalienable Right to Sex?
• Click here for Planned Parenthood’s graphic about consent

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Planned Parenthood’s Absurd Position on HIV Disclosure appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, Tim, Rachel, and I discuss our experiences with relational apologetics.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:06:59

In this clip from the full episode, you’ll hear some conversation about my early experiences and how I came to value relational apologetics.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Relational Apologetics – Part 1 appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:09:40

Unfortunately, there may be a time when threats or acts of violence against you become a reality while sidewalk counseling. It is important to know how to handle such a situation, and, in particular, when and how to involve the police.

Jacob shares about a pretty scary situation that happened to him at an abortion facility, what he did, and why. He follows up with eight practical takeaways.

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Why I Called the Police at the Abortion Facility Last Month appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

In this episode of the Equipped for Life Course Podcast, it’s Rachel’s turn to play pro-life while Tim plays pro-choice.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:09:13

In this clip from the full episode, you’ll hear the first eight minutes of the example dialogue.

Click here to subscribe to the ERI podcast in iTunes.

The post COURSE PODCAST CLIP: Example Dialogues – Pro-Life Rachel & Pro-Choice Tim appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:10:06

This is a continuation of my previous post “Four Practical Dialogue Tips from My Conversation with Brent.” That piece was focused on specific dialogue strategies I used in that conversation. This one is focused on a major aspect of Brent’s view that we were able to get into in detail: the role of sex, the right to it, and how that interacts with his pro-choice view.

Related Links:

• Timothy Brahm: Four Practical Dialogue Tips from My Conversation with Brent
• Click here to buy Dr. Charles Camosy’s book Beyond the Abortion Wars

Click here to share the original article.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes!

Subscribe to the Equipped for Life Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Subscribe to ERI’s other podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

The post PODCAST: Is Abortion Justified by an Inalienable Right to Sex? appeared first on Equal Rights Institute Blog - Clear Pro-Life Thinking.