Pro-Choice Person Converts After Thinking About the Gosnell Case

This is exactly what I’ve been hoping would happen: pro-choice people that think about abortion in a new way because of the Gosnell case, but not stopping there, but then asking a key question: “Is there a morally relevant difference between what Gosnell did and other abortions that are less obviously barbaric?”

A Redditor just posted this brief note on the pro-life subreddit:

The entire Kermit Gosnell case changed me from staunchly pro-choice to pro-life. I am a single 30-year old male…not at all someone who stands to gain from a pro-life view. When I heard the details of this, my stomach turned. I tried to reason with myself as to why this affected me but “standard” abortions did not. Granted, this was beyond the pale, but the message remained clear: this man took human lives.

I don’t want to get downvoted for this change in mindset, but if it happens, it happens. I have to listen to my heart’s message in the matter and while I feel for the women who felt they had no other option, this was not it. I’m uncomfortable with how strongly I feel about the subject, but I can’t make it okay with myself. (emphasis added)

This is why I just published a discussion of how pro-lifers can have productive conversations about Gosnell. It’s all about starting with the common ground of Gosnell, and then leading the conversation purposefully to first trimester abortions. It’s more work, but the chance of changing the person’s mind about abortion altogether are much higher.

Click this link to download the audio, or click the video below to watch a podcast episode I hosted about Gosnell. We discussed how pro-lifers SHOULD talk about Gosnell, how pro-lifers should NOT talk about Gosnell, (but often do,) and briefly respond to the claim that it’s pro-lifers fault that women went to Gosnell’s clinic in the first place.

Question: Do you know of any pro-choice people that have changed their mind after hearing about the Gosnell case? Post the story in the comments!


Josh Brahm is the President of Equal Rights Institute, an organization that trains pro-life advocates to think clearly, reason honestly and argue persuasively.

Josh has worked in the pro-life movement since he was 18. A sought-after speaker, Josh has spoken for more than 23,000 people in six countries and in 22 of the 50 states.

Josh’s primary passion is helping pro-life people to be more persuasive when they communicate with pro-choice people. That means ditching faulty rhetoric and tactics and embracing arguments that hold up under philosophical scrutiny.

He has publicly debated leaders from Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), Georgians for Choice, and one of the leading abortion facilities in Atlanta.

Josh also wants to bring relational apologetics to the pro-life movement. “Some pro-choice people will not change their mind after one conversation on a college campus. Some of them will only change their mind after dozens of conversations with a person they trust in the context of friendship.”

Josh is formerly the host of a globally-heard podcast turned radio/TV show, Life Report. He now hosts the Equipped for Life Podcast. He’s also written dozens of articles for and the ERI blog.

He directed the first 40 Days for Life campaign in Fresno, resulting in up to 60 lives saved.

Josh has been happily married to his wife, Hannah, for 15 years. They have three sons, Noah, William, and Eli. They live in Charlotte, North Carolina.

David Bereit, the National Director of 40 Days for Life, sums up Josh’s expertise this way: “Josh Brahm is one of the brightest, most articulate, and innovative people in the pro-life movement. His cutting-edge work is helping people think more clearly, communicate more effectively, and — most importantly — be better ambassadors for Christ. I wholeheartedly endorse Josh’s work, and I encourage you to join me in following Josh and getting involved in his work today!”

Please note: The goal of the comments section on this blog is simply and unambiguously to promote productive dialogue. We reserve the right to delete comments that are snarky, disrespectful, flagrantly uncharitable, offensive, or off-topic. If in doubt, read our Comments Policy.