Ep. 232 - Why the Pro-Life Movement is Splitting

Why is the pro-life movement splitting after Roe? In this episode of the Prolife Team podcast, host Jacob sits down with historian Daniel Williams, author of Defenders of the Unborn, to talk about where the movement came from and where it's headed. 

Daniel explains the rise of the abolitionist movement and how it differs from the step-by-step approach most pro-life groups have taken. He compares today's debate to the fight over slavery in the 1800s, looks at what Prohibition can teach us, and talks about how the abortion pill has changed everything. 

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:34

To my heart to sing my great streams of mercy, never ceasing. Call the song the loudest praise. Teach me some hello the sonnet. Let's sing my heart to sing. Dream is a birthday, ever season all the songs. I don't know why.

SPEAKER_03 5:16

Daniel, would you give us a little bit about your backstory? Um, and then we'll just dive right into the topic and chat about it.

SPEAKER_00 5:23

Sure. Uh I'm a historian of American religion and politics. And so today I assume I'll I'll be speaking somewhat from that historical perspective. Uh, but I've written fairly widely on uh the history of the pro-life movement as well as the larger history of Christians and American politics. My first book was uh God's own party, which was a history of the Christian right, but then my second book was directly a history of the pro-life movement. It was Defenders of the Unborn, that came out about 10 years ago. And then more recently I've returned uh to the topic with another book called Abortion in America's Churches, which examines the theology of people on uh multiple sides of the abortion debate. Uh I've also uh written pretty widely about uh the pro-life movement and abortion politics for a variety of outlets, including uh Christianity Today. Uh I'm an associate professor of history at uh Ashland University, uh, but I'm also a contributing writer for uh Christianity Today. And uh a couple weeks ago I published uh a piece that looked uh briefly at uh some of the new trends with uh the abortion abolitionist movement.

SPEAKER_03 6:34

Awesome. Yeah, so yeah, tell us what your thoughts are. Um would you like to start with the pro-life movement backstory, or do you want to go right into the abolitionist impact?

SPEAKER_00 6:46

We can talk a little bit about uh the backstory of the pro-life movement to get started. Uh the pro-life movement uh started uh as an organized movement in the mid-1960s. Of course, there had been uh uh people for uh many centuries who had been concerned about uh the unborn and Christian writings that uh discuss uh concern for the unborn, going back to uh the second century, some of the earliest days of the church. But as an organized movement in the United States, it started in the mid-1960s in reaction to uh uh uh abortion liberalization law proposals. And uh that pre-Row uh pro-life movement was somewhat successful at slowing the pace of uh abortion legalization uh proposals. Uh, but then Roe v. Wade happened in 1973. Uh the pro-life movement expanded uh pretty dramatically out of its uh primarily uh Catholic, though not exclusively Catholic, but primarily Catholic enclaves into a uh a much broader national movement. Uh by the 1980s, uh evangelical Protestants were uh a dominant force in the movement along with uh Catholics. And for some decades, uh both groups uh worked pretty closely together, and most of them made uh overturning Roe v. Wade their highest priority. There were some differences in strategy. So, for example, in the late 1980s, the pro-life movement was divided over direct action tactics associated with Operation Rescue. There were uh there were pro-life activists that strongly supported those. There were also uh veterans of the pro-life movement like Dr. Jock Wilkie, president of National Uh Right to Life, who very much opposed what Operation Rescue uh was doing. So divisions in the pro-life movement uh are not new, but in recent years, meaning primarily the last uh four years since uh Roe v. Wade was overturned in Dobbs, I think uh factions within the the pro-life movement have uh given increasing voice to uh very different proposals on how to go forward. Maybe that's not too surprising since uh one of the unifying factors, at least as a short-term strategy, overturning Roe v. Wade, uh, has been accomplished. And yet, as all sides in the pro-life movement have noted, uh the uh number of abortions in the United States has actually continued to increase. And so there's a sense of frustration uh on uh uh the part of almost all people in the movement over the state of what's happening uh in the United States, and uh but uh a real difference of opinion uh as to uh how to proceed. And I think uh with the abortion abolitionist movement, uh, we have a a fairly new uh proposal. It goes back to the late uh 2010s as uh an organized movement, but a fairly new proposal that's uh rapidly gaining ground in some circles uh and is also causing a lot of controversy uh in other circles, especially among longtime uh pro-life activists who believe that it's a proposal to uh uh pass what they call equal protection laws, which would penalize uh all of those involved in an abortion, including uh the pregnant women involved, uh with the same penalties that are applied to murder. Uh so people could be charged with homicide uh for taking abortion pills. And uh some uh uh people who are minority uh among opponents of abortion uh have supported that. It seems to be more people this year who support it than supported it uh just a couple of years ago. But there are also a sizable number of pro-life activists who still seem to be in the majority in the movement who have said not only is this a bad idea, but it would actually compromise some fundamental principles that the pro-life movement has stood for.

SPEAKER_03 10:49

So yeah, tell us more about the you know, what you know about the abolitionists, the history during the 16 years and the buildup and and I and I and I would agree that I've seen it seems like it's a growing movement in the last couple of years with uh it picking up steam on people agreeing or taking on that that side. But I was it's it's obviously still a minority, but it's a growing minority.

SPEAKER_00 11:16

Yeah. Uh I I'll have to say I'm not an expert on the abortion abolitionist movement, but from what I've been able to determine, its strength is almost entirely among uh very conservative, both uh theologically and politically, uh evangelical Protestants. So in 2021, the Southern Baptist Convention passed uh uh an abortion abolitionist resolution, uh called Resolution to Abolish Abortion. Uh and uh groups such as uh Foundation to Abolish Abortion uh have been uh making a lot of political headway, uh, especially in uh conservative Southern and some Mountain West states, like Idaho, for example. Uh if you look at the uh board members, the uh short biographies that are available online for the board members of Foundation to Abolish Abortion or for their staff, it seems to be overwhelmingly uh conservative evangelical Protestant, as far as I've been able to tell. Uh similarly, with the states in which they uh have gained ground uh in terms of influence on state legislatures, those are generally uh very heavily evangelical states. So it does seem to me, uh looking at this uh from the outside, and again with the caveat that uh I'm not an expert in uh the abortion abolitionist movement uh in particular. I'm just studying it as part of this larger uh history of the pro-life movement more broadly. But uh it does seem to me like it has this unusual, uh unusually close association with uh particular ideas among uh some subgroups within conservative evangelical Protestantism. And uh it has not gained traction uh to nearly the same degree uh with theologically conservative Catholics. Not that there would not be any conserv theologically conservative Catholics associated with the movement, but uh it is it is striking to me from a historical perspective that while Catholics have led almost every uh aspect of the pro-life movement from its beginnings in the mid-1960s until now, uh including controversial areas like uh direct action in the 1980s, definitely had a lot of evangelical Protestants involved, like Randall Terry, who was evangelical Protestant at the time, but also had uh a number of uh prominent Catholics uh like uh Joseph Scheidler and numerous others. Uh but this particular uh division uh seems not to uh appeal to nearly as many Catholics as to evangelical Protestants. And so as a historian of American religion, one of the things that uh that uh prompts uh my interest when I see something like that is to ask the question, is there uh is there something theologically within either tradition that might uh lead people to support this or or not support this? Why why would there be this religious division in a movement that uh traditionally has not had that uh that stark of a of a religious division over a particular strategy?

SPEAKER_03 14:22

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So let's let's um maybe let's speak to the the bridge, the bridge that we've had over well decades between different religious groups that often um you know may not have had a lot of uh you know uh other bridges besides the pro-life bridge. Um and so this bridge between Catholics, Protestants, you know, different followers of Jesus under different in different groups, um, working together side by side on a common mission and you know a common um, you know, essentially maybe 80% overlap on faith, but having 20% difference in uh in some areas. Um let's just talk about that bridge some more and that that shared space that we've that we've really enjoyed. And it seems to be a pretty unique bridge in the world that we live in to have you know these groups that often didn't overlap or touch each other, you know, very often, maybe. Seems like the pro-life bridge was probably the best bridge that I've ever seen.

SPEAKER_00 15:27

Yeah, yeah, I think you're right. Uh opposition to abortion and concern for unborn human life are principles that are deeply rooted in the history of Christianity uh across all theological divides. So uh the earliest documents that we have uh from the ancient church on this specifically talk about abortion and decry it, forbid it, uh are documents that really every tradition of of Christianity would share more or less, uh maybe not necessarily as authoritative documents, but definitely as part of their DNA. So these are documents like the Dedic and some of the earliest Christian writings outside of the New Testament, like the Epistle of Barnabas, for example. And when the Protestant Reformation occurred uh in the 16th century, some of the most famous reformers uh expressed uh concerns about abortion and unborn human life. So John Calvin, for example, in his commentary on Exodus, in referring to a passage that sometimes brought into uh the abortion debate today, uh gave a very clear affirmation of uh unborn human life being equally valuable with uh with uh life after birth. So uh although some uh religious advocates for abortion rights have tried to make the claim that uh that uh opposition to abortion is not deeply rooted in in Christianity and that it's a a recent uh Catholic sectarian idea, those claims have certainly been made. Uh it is uh it seems very clear to me from the evidence that uh on the contrary, uh opposition to abortion and concern for unborn human life uh can be traced back to the earliest days of the church, and uh that uh when there was a division uh between uh the uh Eastern Church and the Western Church uh in the 11th century or in the in the six in the 16th century between uh Catholics and Protestants, uh initially those those divisions did not affect uh the abortion debate. There were obviously many arguments between uh Catholics and Protestants during the Reformation era, but uh the question of abortion was not one of those arguments. And so uh I think that informed uh the discussion when abortion legalization began to be seriously proposed at the state level in the 1960s. Uh there were a number of liberal Protestants that did support uh uh abortion rights, and I I detail that at some length uh in my book, Abortion in America's Churches. But uh while it took a few years, uh evangelical Protestants did end up on the pro-life side of the divide. And they were never really uh supporters of abortion rights. There were individual evangelical Protestants that did uh uh especially before Roe, give some uh support for uh abortion legalization. But uh the dominant uh strand of thinking in evangelical Protestantism before uh Roe was that abortion was was generally wrong, though most of them did not take quite as absolutist a stance on that as as uh theologically faithful Catholics. Uh but after Roe, uh evangelical Protestants moved by and large from thinking that uh abortion was mostly wrong, with maybe a couple of exceptions for rape and incest and uh possibly dangerous to a woman's health, though not everyone agreed on that, uh, moved from that stance toward thinking that abortion actually was uh a more serious problem and that maybe it was wrong in in all or nearly all circumstances. And uh one of the instrumental voices in moving uh the conversation to that point among evangelicals was Francis Schaefer in the mid to late 1970s. He uh co-authored a book and documentary with uh Dr. C. Everett Koop, who would become Surgeon General in the Reagan administration, uh, that talked about the evils of abortion that really echoed very much most of the arguments that Catholics had been making for the previous decade or so. Uh so uh as the Christian right emerged as an evangelical-dominated uh coalition, uh it made opposition to abortion a central part of its platform. Uh but uh to a much greater degree than than had been the case among Catholics, also linked that to a larger uh conservative program. Uh and over the course of the 1980s, a number of Catholics came to accept that larger conservative framing of the issue. Not all Catholics did. Uh, and there was some division among Catholics uh uh uh over whether there should be a consistent life ethic being pushed or whether uh abortion should really be a standalone issue. Uh uh both groups in this debate tended to see abortion as a great evil, but the question was how to frame the issue, and that did tend to divide Catholics politically. And so there were definitely divisions among Catholics, uh, and there were uh different perspectives as well. Uh uh and when Catholics and evangelicals discussed this issue, while they agreed on a great deal, uh most evangelicals who joined the pro-life movement were pretty comfortable with capital punishment. A number of Catholics who joined the movement uh believed that uh capital punishment was not compatible with their view of protecting human life. And so there I would say that while the two groups were not identical uh in their their viewpoint on all uh human life issues, and while there were internal differences among evangelicals and internal differences among Catholics, nevertheless, over the course of the 1980s and beyond what characterized the movement was uh an overwhelming consensus on the central points, the idea that uh human life should be protected from the moment of conception, the idea that uh abortion was a great evil uh that needed to be stopped, and the idea that there should be uh some sort of I ideally uh a national constitutional recognition of unborn uh human life. And uh I I think pro life activists often realized they couldn't uh they couldn't. Accomplish all of that immediately, and there were differences between gradualists that were incrementalists and those who who wanted some more immediate action. But the philosophical framing was pretty similar.

SPEAKER_03 22:13

Yeah. So yeah, speaking of incrementalists versus well, people that want well, the abolitionists, I think everyone would agree. Let me know what your thoughts are on this, but I think everyone would agree whether they're incremental or abolitionist, that they would love to see it completely abolished, but the way to get there is by taking what ground is available incrementally, more so than setting the bar to the point where it never gets achieved. What are your thoughts on that? And how would you just yeah, how would you reflect that in the history? What are your thoughts on that about that in the history?

SPEAKER_00 22:51

Yeah, uh that debate has been going on for quite some time. In fact, in the 1980s, one of the reasons that many people joined direct action organizations like Operation Rescue was that they were getting frustrated with the incrementalists and they were feeling like nothing was really changing. And that, by the way, of course, characterizes nearly all movements, all social movements. So in the civil rights movement of the 1960s, there were debates between people who favored more gradualist measures of working within the system versus those who wanted to engage in more militant uh action. Uh maybe even more relevant for this, given that the abortion abolitionists have taken their name very direct, very deliberately from uh the abolitionist movement against slavery in the anti-slavery movement of the time period just before the Civil War, there were significant divisions between those who uh wanted uh immediate action, and maybe the most radical of those would have been uh someone like John Brown leading a raid on the South in order to start a slave revolt, versus those who who believed in working very gradually. And Abraham Lincoln, for example, was very much a gradualist when it came to abolishing slavery. Now, ultimately, of course, he did issue the Emancipation Proclamation, and he was very happy to do so. But uh, in the years leading up to that, he was very much working within the political system and supporting uh measures that he believed would limit the expansion of slavery, not abolish uh slavery immediately, which before the Civil War seemed to be politically impossible. So this is uh this is a very old debate. It it uh is not unique to the debate over abortion, but it's not too surprising that for people who recognize the seriousness of the issue and who believe, uh, which is true, I think, of all pro-life activists, that this is murder, this is killing a human being, uh there are a number of people who would who would be frustrated with measures that will not stop abortions this year or next year. And I think that that's one of the greatest appeals of the abortion abolitionist movement is this promise that you can stop uh abortion immediately. Now, for the opponents of the abortion abolitionist movement, they would make uh at least two countercharges. One is there's nothing that the abortion abolitionist movement has proposed that they would say would stop abortion immediately. And secondly, they would also say uh even more seriously that the types of things that the abortion abolitionist movement would like to do actually would make it more difficult to try to reduce uh the abortion rate and and gain uh political alliances that might actually have an effect. So that that debate, which is actually somewhat similar uh with the debate about direct action in the late 1980s that the pro-life movement had, uh I think speaks to this larger question that is really a uh uh philosophical question going well beyond the pro-life movement, which is how do you create political change? Do you create uh political change by uh demonstrating uh in the street, so to speak, metaphorically, the abortion abolitionist movement, of course, is not literally doing that, but but uh taking strong armed measures that are that are going to force a change uh in the hope that that that would apply enough pressure to stop whatever evil you're fighting? Or do you look at the political layout and say, where can we find common ground with our opponents? Uh can we at least agree on some measures that would move move the country in in the right direction and are we able to accomplish something by working within the political system? That's that's an age-old question. And there are no uh easy ways to resolve that uh apart from a lot of detailed conversations about how politics works, about the state of uh uh of the political landscape, and about empirical studies that perhaps can be taken as to the possible effects of particular legislative proposals.

SPEAKER_03 27:24

So so Daniel, when I was in well, when I was in school, I always struggled with history because I had a hard time remembering lots of facts and stories, but uh, and I and I wouldn't sit still enough to read, you know, to read and memorize my history. Um but one thing I do remember is that you know that people would often say if you don't know your history, you're doomed to repeat it. And so I'm wondering, um, where could we learn from, you know, what what historical accounts can we learn from that will impact you know this where we're where we're at today in the pro-life movement, perhaps? Like could we learn from what's you know the where where another country has gone who's more progressive than we are, or who's in a position that might reflect where we're heading? Or what could we learn from, like you mentioned when it came to abolishing slavery, you know, what lessons are there that we could that may impact our decisions today, or you know, help us know what to not to avoid or help us not repeat? Um, and then also like what other stories, like are there stories in the Bible or another parts of our history, like um, you know, learning from you know how the enemy went after, you know, and used infanticide to try and go after Jesus or to go after Moses. And I'm wondering like what other stories could we learn from or historical accounts so that we better equipped to not to not fall into that trap of repeating history.

SPEAKER_00 28:53

Yeah. Well, I I think that's a good question. It's more difficult to answer than we might imagine because while there is there are repeating cycles in history, they don't always uh look exactly the same. And so the lessons that we take from history are not uh necessarily the type of principles that could be uh compared to to a mathematical proof or or even uh a science a science experiment where if you've set everything up correctly, you you should be able to get uh repeated results that can be verified. And that's that's not really the way history works because uh you never have the exact same factors. And so uh the pro-life movement predicted from the very beginning in the 1960s that legalized abortion would lead to a disrespect for human life. And they predicted that it would lead to uh infanticide and euthanasia. Those were the two big uh issues that they they talked about. And uh there's certainly some element of that. So for several years after this, in fact, decades after this, I think uh opponents could look at this and say, look, this hasn't led to anything like that. So I think we're fine. Uh but in the last 10 years, there's been a marked increase in uh Americans' support for uh right to die, legislation, physic physician-assisted suicide. And uh, of course, in Canada it it's been widely legalized. In the U.S., it's been partially legalized, depending on the state. So that's what pro-life activists predicted as early as 1965. Um maybe things didn't occur exactly on the same timescale that they predicted or in exactly the same way. Uh but I do think that the general trajectory uh that they predicted does seem to be uh unfolding to a certain extent. Now they also predicted uh that eventually the U.S., uh, if it went down this road, could end up uh like Nazi Germany. And hopefully they're wrong about that. Uh but it's always it's always difficult to know really what the next step will be in a particular uh moral progression or moral decline. Uh as far as lessons for pro-life the pro-life movement's strategy, uh I think I would perhaps look at this larger question of what can historical examples tell us about laws that work and laws that don't, and how uh moral uh a new societal moral consensus arrives. And in general, with legislation, it's it's difficult to think of an example where a law that is not supported by very many people uh will accomplish something without protest. And so I I think right now it's pretty clear that that nationally uh there's not uh national support for a law against abortion on the national scale. And so if, for example, uh the U.S. government, the federal government was to uh creatively apply the Comstock Stock Act, for example, to to try to uh ban abortion in the United States, I I would predict, based on where public opinion is now and and based on what I've seen from historical examples, that that that would lead to significant backlash and that and significant noncompliance. To get to widespread compliance with with something, you you really have to uh to move to a point where where the opponents of a measure are are in such a small minority that they don't have the power to lead a mass movement against this. And that's uh that's relatively rare. It has happened. Uh it doesn't usually happen easily. And I think when we when we drill down, we find that it's it's very easy for people to overreach. Uh so for example, with the civil rights movement of the 1960s, there was there was pretty widespread support among whites, especially in the North, for uh the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act. There was not nearly as much support for uh busing across uh town to try to achieve integration of schools and affirmative action. Both of those led to backlash in the 1970s. And I could give you a number of other examples as well, but but I think that's uh those type of examples are are principles I think that I would encourage the pro-life movement to keep in mind. I know that abortion abolitionists don't like to think in those terms at all. But I I would say that you have to look at where public opinion is and you have to say, okay, what is achievable and what are the areas where there's majority support against majority opposition to this, and so it it's not it's not likely we're going to be able to achieve this without a backlash. And we've if we have the courts impose it, you can expect a grassroots movement to try to overturn that, which is exactly what happened with both uh busing and with affirmative action. Uh I know the the abolitionist movement, the abortion abolitionist movement, is is uh taking its cue, taking its inspiration from the abolitionist movement uh before the Civil War that tried to abolish slavery. Um I think we can certainly admire people in the abolitionist movement. Uh I am concerned about some of the most extreme tactics that some of them use, like John Brown, uh both as a Christian and as a citizen, I'm I'm not sure that really uh that really accomplished something useful. But uh I I would say this to people who would who would draw a direct line between the abolitionist movement and the and the uh abortion abolitionist movement today is that according to uh the latest scholarship on the subject, uh I read a book that just came out this year that was looking at the abolitionist movement, it said on the eve of the Civil War in 1860, uh the percentage of Northern whites who favored immediate abolition and full racial equality, the most radical stance, was no higher than 2% of the population. Now, there was a much larger percentage of people who were opposed to slavery or opposed to the expansion of slavery, but but that sense of immediate uh abolition and full legal equality uh it was just a very extreme position associated with people like William Wood Garrison and others, but but they did not have a whole lot of political influence. And it really took a civil war to change public opinion on the question and move uh legislation that really didn't have a chance before the Civil War. So we can be thankful the legislation uh occurred, but uh I think we also have to ask the question of the abortion abolitionist movement. Uh assuming you're not planning a civil war, uh what is your plan to try to get uh support for these measures that at least at the moment, if they if they were likely to be passed, would would result in a significant backlash almost certainly.

SPEAKER_03 37:02

Interesting. Can you tell us um what are your thoughts about the abortion pill? And we based on what I understand as of today, the abortion pill here in the US might represent about two-thirds of abortions. However, in like the UK, it's estimated between 80 to 97 percent or about 93 percent of abortions are done with the abortion pill. And I'm almost wondering, you know, is there is there a lesson for us to learn from a group that's you know gone further with the abortion pill being the most common uh type of abortion? And and again, maybe it's based on all the variables, and but there's probably some uh some lessons for us to learn with, you know, maybe in regards to their um socialized medicine, maybe in regards to just, you know, the the freedom of speech that they currently don't have and we do have. Um so I don't know, I'm just wondering, like, yeah, so when it comes to the abortion pill, maybe let's talk about you know the history of where that has come from and where we are, and and again, trying to learn, you know, figure I'm always looking for where we're going as well as where we've been because I'm trying to figure out what to do today and get ready for for tomorrow. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 38:26

Yeah, uh the abortion pill uh has been around, of course, for a while, been around for about 30 years, but uh was approved uh by the FDA uh for use in the United States in the year 2000, and it took off pretty slowly at first. But I I think the reason that it has gained ground uh so rapidly today is uh, first of all, uh with COVID, uh, and secondly after that with uh restrictions on abortion in more conservative states. And so it was uh once people began using the abortion pill more frequently, I think they turned to it not only because it was it was easier to obtain, but also as a matter of perceived convenience. Uh the abortion pill, as I think we both know, is not uh quite as uh uh consequence-free or as um uh maybe uh easy to use as what uh people in the abortion rights movement have tried to uh say that it is. But nevertheless, uh it does uh privatize the abortion experience. It it makes it possible to uh to have a self-administered abortion with minimal uh outside medical interference. And I think that's very attractive to a lot of people. And of course, as more people take the abortion pill, then then the movement for it accelerates. And I think uh there's probably no turning back the clock uh unless there's there's a widespread public perception that the abortion pill is not safe, uh, which is not something that I really see uh uh uh as a perception that's developing outside of uh pro-life circles. I think that uh we're likely to see increased percentages of people that rely on the abortion pill. And uh as that happens, I think the surgical abortion services are probably going to be uh reduced just as a matter of of uh supply and demand. If 70% of people start using the abortion pill and then 80 percent will who are having 70 or 80 percent of people who are having abortions, well, eventually uh some abortion clinics may start uh reducing the number of hours that a physician would be available for uh for for a surgical abortion and really start promoting the abortion pill. And so it's a it's a cycle that feeds on itself. And I suspect that's what's happened in in Europe, as people uh just rely increasingly on the abortion pill, that becomes the default, and surgical abortions are reserved for more exceptional cases, late-term abortions, uh that sort of thing uh that would not be covered by an abortion pill. So then the question is, well, what does this do for the pro-life movement? I think it makes things considerably more difficult because it moves uh abortion from being an issue of uh service that's provided at designated locations where you can have protesters, where you can have visibility, uh, and starts to move it into a different realm. Uh so if we're looking for historical examples, I would look at Prohibition. Prohibition was very successful at shutting down the saloon as an institution. Saloons, of course, bit were businesses. Businesses can be shut down, they're very public. Uh it was not very successful at uh getting rid of alcohol, in fact, not very successful at all at that. And in the same way, uh the pro-life movement might end up with a Pyrrhic victory where uh abortion clinics as standalone clinics with abortions provided on site become relatively rare, uh, while uh male-order abortion pills can be something that proliferates. And we've had a decades-long war on drugs that uh has had uh mixed success at best, outright failure at worst, in terms of trying to stop uh drugs. And so I suspect that the pro-life movement is going to have to pivot. It's not going to be a very easy pivot, but uh it's it's probably gonna have to pivot from attempts to reduce the supply to attempts to reduce demand. Uh I think there are still possible ways that the supply could theoretically be reduced. Uh uh if the Fed if the the FDA, for example, uh banned methapristol, that might be one uh such route. But I suspect given the ease of ordering pills from overseas, that would actually not have as pronounced an effect as we might like. And so if that's the case, if there's if there's nothing that the government can do at either the state or federal level, and certainly not at the state level, uh as we've seen in the last couple of years, to uh significantly reduce the supply of abortion pills, then we would have to say that that the next step would have to be uh finding ways to reduce demand, uh, whatever form that might take. Can we uh expand uh the the work of crisis pregnancy centers and in providing uh help to women who are considering abortion? Can we uh create a changed national conversation so that people value unborn human life? Are there other things that we can do? And uh that that's probably going to have to be the path forward for the pro-life movement. But I I think as a whole, the pro-life movement is not quite there yet. We're we're still in this transition stage. Everything is happening so quickly. Uh but if if, as I think is likely, the abortion pill becomes uh the overwhelming default for people who are thinking about abortions, then eventually uh a change in in approach will be necessary.

SPEAKER_03 44:38

So in the beginning of this movement, uh well, from the the beginning of my understanding of the movement, um when we didn't have many pregnancy clinics, maybe we had zero to 10. But you know, back at that point, maybe it was 52 years ago or 45, 48 to 52 years ago. Um, and when people wanted to do work back then, my understanding is they would they would have they set up these hotlines as one of their first ideas, and then people could call, and then they would try and help someone remotely over the phone. And today, I feel like we're experiencing a bit of a let's go back to our roots story with people getting telemedicine care, you know, remote care or remote pills from the abortion industry, and they're not going into the brick and mortars like they used to to get in-person services, you know, moving the sidewalk to someone's mailbox where they get it in the mail. And and but essentially getting it remotely, they get it shipped to them. Maybe they don't even get a phone call or tela anything, and it's just simply them ordering it from India with a but uh so essentially getting the pills remotely, and then if we're able to help someone, getting that person to go to an in-person, oh, I can't just lost you. I can pause here. Hopefully, you can come back. I can uh fix this in post.

SPEAKER_04 46:11

No. Let me see if I can call you.

SPEAKER_03 46:18

No worries, no worries. Hey Daniel, looks like I lost you. Can you reconnect?

SPEAKER_04 46:26

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 46:28

Okay, yeah, take your time. No worries. I can edit this in the post, no worries.

unknown 46:33

Okay, okay.

SPEAKER_03 46:34

All right.

SPEAKER_00 46:34

I'll put you online in a minute.

SPEAKER_04 46:35

Okay. Hey, no worries.

SPEAKER_03 46:39

No worries. Yeah, I can I'll edit that in post. Hopefully, I don't for yeah, I left the big gap, so it'll be easy for me to identify. Okay. Um I'll start off, I'll start over with that uh question. Um at the end, I might want you to go to riverside.com slash upload. Um I'll go over that at the very end, just in case there's more than one file to be uploaded. So the first part may be low quality, unless we can get it uploaded, but it may be okay. Um, so I'm gonna go ahead and start over here with that question. So in the beginning of the movement, um, 48, 52 years ago, um, when there weren't many brick and mortars, some people provided hotlines for helping someone when they're in a situation, you know, doing like for example, Sister Paula. Uh, I know, you know, she I remember hearing stories about her entering the phone and helping people remotely. And fast forward to today, where we have many people getting the pill shipped to them or getting it remotely, maybe via tele telemedicine, or maybe just doing do-it-yourself, ordering it remotely without a prescription. And and so there seems to be a you know um an opportunity for us to learn from that ambition and that uh you know, just simply responding to the need back in the beginning of our movement by answering the phone and helping someone who doesn't live in our Tri-County area. Can you just get you know, talk about um talk about you know helping someone remotely and how that may you know in the what you may know from the beginning and how that may impact where we're at today. And because right in the beginning, we had a big desert where we didn't have a pregnancy clinic to send someone to. And today we still have deserts. Um, and uh the UK's got a big desert, Canada's got some pretty big desert space, and then in the US, we have several deserts where there's you know, there's not coverage by a local clinic. And I'm I'm trying to imagine how telecare can help us support those deserts. And just like you to speak about, yeah, that concept of telecare, remote service, and and maybe the history of that, if as you may know it.

SPEAKER_00 49:01

Yeah, um, I I think you're right. So organizations like uh Birthright International, for example, or or CareNet started out as uh organizations that would would have hotlines. Uh originally very low-tech operations, they would just take turns, people uh on the team would just take turns um standing by to answer phones at all hours of the day. Uh now I think uh a number of local crisis pregnancy centers are uh supporting or or tied into networks that rely on on uh internet contact. So people can answer a social media ad, for example, click on that, and then immediately get uh put in touch with an organization that can care for them. So I I think that's that's how a lot of uh the work of crisis pregnancy centers is being conducted. I know our the local crisis pregnancy center uh in Ashland, uh Ohio, which is where I am, has for the past couple of years relied on uh these internet apps. So I yes, I imagine that's that's probably that will probably be helpful. And I think the more that the word can get out, and and certainly there are billboards and other uh other forms of advertising and and have been for decades to try to encourage women facing a crisis pregnancy to to reach out for resources. There are definitely groups that are trying to help them. Um I I think that we probably should uh think more about uh the reasons people have abortions and so crisis pregnancy centers I think play a vital role in meeting needs on a short-term basis. And then the question is, are there larger structural issues that could help reduce uh abortion? So uh I I think um Americans United for Life has uh supported uh legislative proposals that so far um haven't been passed at the federal level, though there are some states that have have adopted some of these measures to uh to make birth free. To uh people are are often saddled with significant medical bills when they uh go to the hospital to have a child, and for all of the months leading up to that and all the months after that, with uh doctor's visits and vaccinations and other uh issues. If if, as some surveys indicate, that more than 50% of women who are having abortions say that financial reasons are a factor in their decision. And and if it's the case that about 60% or so of uh of women having abortions already have at least one child. So it's it's not like this is their first pregnancy. They're not opposed to having a child. It's that they they are well aware of the financial burden and and uh other forms of responsibility that come with having uh an additional child. And so if we can think about that, think about how we can perhaps reach out uh to people in that situation with compassion, I think that would be very much in keeping with the historic commitments of the pro-life movement. It would also be very, very much opposed to what uh I think the abortion abolitionists are trying to do. And for that reason, I think it would provide a good counter witness. So the pro-life movement would not just say, well, we're going to support a gradualist measure or or uh incremental laws to make abortion more difficult, and people from the outside can say, well, that doesn't seem to be working. The abortion abolitionists seem to have uh a plan that looks like it's actually going to hold people accountable for abortion. And if if that's the debate, I think the pro-life movement is on losing ground. Uh it can't really make a claim that it that its own strategies are necessarily uh working to try to reduce the abortion rate. But on the other hand, if the pro-life movement can say it's not just a a matter of trying to uh make abortions more difficult to obtain, although that's not a to the extent that that can be done, that maybe that's helpful. But but more importantly, it's about uh offering this holistic form of care to say, how do we take people who are some of the most vulnerable people in society, including not just the unborn, but a lot of women facing crisis situations, women who are predominantly low income, women who are facing uh unstable relationships and who are experiencing all of the factors that tend to lead people to consider abortion. If we can say uh we want to create a more compassionate society for all of these people, we want to give people more options. We want to say uh to them that that abortion is not a choice you have to make. Abortion uh there's something better. And we're inviting you to uh to choose that and equipping you with the resources to be able to make a meaningful choice.

SPEAKER_03 54:34

Interesting. Um when it comes to your historical research, um does it ever have you seen data or or history, you know, recordings of like you know, um how someone connects with a pregnancy clinic? Is that ever been in part of the historical document? You know, the documents that you research, like so what I've seen, um uh I would say 15, 15 plus years ago. So before 2011, pregnancy clinics would always reach client. You know, the number one way that they would reach clients was word of mouth by a friend or word of mouth by a professional. And then since 2011 through today, uh it's been gradually and now regularly, Google slash internet is you know the way that they reach clients, and word of mouth is second on that list, and then below that would be signage, uh social media, billboard, and other other things would be very you know, trailing. Like, for example, yellow pages used to be on the list and it's fallen off completely many years ago. And so I'm wondering, is there any like history on you know marketing methods?

SPEAKER_04 55:51

Is that something that you've you read about or you've seen? Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 55:58

Uh so I think traditionally the uh crisis pregnancy clinics tended to reach people uh in some fairly traditional ways. So, number one, location. Uh an inor uh an enormously high number of these clinics were located directly across the street or just on the other side of the shopping center from uh Planned Parenthood clinics or other abortion clinics. That was that was very typical. So they would deliberately try to get a space as close as possible to uh the abortion clinic so that people would see it. Uh the yellow pages were very common. In fact, there were a number of controversies about that, about how how people could advertise. Did you and some some uh Yellow Pages uh companies had to uh uh implemented rules that you had if you were not providing abortion services, you had to say very directly in your ad, we do not provide abortion services. And so uh there were some some uh there were some controversies about advertising. Also uh billboard advertising, ads in student newspapers on campuses, those were all very common ways in which people would try to reach uh women who were experiencing pr a crisis pregnancy and considering an abortion. But I I think you're right. Uh I don't have the numbers on this, but from what I've heard anecdotally, uh people are generally finding both abortion pills online and finding uh crisis pregnancy centers online. That that the entire uh search is an is an online search. And I guess that's not too surprising. Uh by definition, the people who are are considering abortion or or facing crisis pregnancy are uh on the younger side, uh presumably hardly any over the age of 45, and average would be in their uh mid-20s, with with about half half the women below that. Uh so I I think for Gen Z, uh, which is primarily what we're talking about, the very youngest millennials and Gen Zers, uh online searches are how business is done. That's just how how you live life. So it's not too surprising that that would be the case with crisis pregnancy uh centers. Uh I do think that one of the one of the frustrations that a lot of crisis pregnancy centers are experiencing is that the majority of the women who come into the crisis pregnancy center are women who were not designing to have an abortion to begin with. Now, I think those women still need to be helped, and I think crisis pregnancy centers are performing a very useful service in doing that. That's they should not be in the business just of trying to stop abortions. But uh one of the frustrations they they feel is that uh increasingly a woman who walks into a Planned Parenthood clinic is not trying to make up her mind. She has already made up her mind when she walks in or when she orders abortion pills. Uh, she's already made up her mind as to what she wants to do. And uh I I think that uh suggests that while uh the traditional strategy of a crisis pregnancy center, which is if you can just get them in and then show an ultra a color ultrasound, that maybe that will be enough to change the conversation, uh that uh that strategy may uh may not be enough. Uh I think there's probably the the need for uh some larger conversations that maybe take place uh before someone faces a crisis, pregnancy, or or uh uh for maybe a conversation that takes place in in other venues as well. Uh one of the things, of course, that that abortion pills, uh culture of abortion pills tends to encourage is a very quick decision on this, because abortion pills can only be used in the very earliest weeks of pregnancy. After the first trimester, uh they're uh they're widely considered, even by people who are abortion providers, as unsafe uh to use for second trimester pregnancies. So there's a very limited time frame in which people um have to make a decision. And so oftentimes uh they they make the decision quickly, and then uh a crisis pregnancy center doesn't necessarily get a chance to intervene. Um that's that's a difficult issue. Crisis pregnancy centers have uh I think struggled with that for years, but uh it's become even more of an issue now uh with the changes in technology and the increasing shift toward uh abortions earlier and earlier in pregnancy.

SPEAKER_03 1:00:54

Um when it comes to pregnancy clinics and the names that they've had over the years, um what what are your what have you seen in the oh is my internet are you can you hear me okay? Uh you're breaking up a little, but um I can I can I think I can make it out. Yeah, my internet broke up for a moment there. So when it comes to the names that pregnancy clinics have had over the years, um, you know, many started off as uh birthrights, and then there were care nets, lots of care nets, and there were um several, you know, crisis pregnancy center of city name. Um and then maybe 20 years ago, many started changing their names to try and be more friendly to you know to use new language to reach women, using the word care, using the word help, um options, um, just a wide range of names. What kind of um, you know, from your have you seen any read any historical, you know, part of your historical research, what are your thoughts on the names and the and that trending or changes that has happened over this uh span of 60 or 50, 50-ish years that we've had?

SPEAKER_00 1:02:06

Yeah. Well, I think that in general they have tried to create to adopt names that have not necessarily signaled to people that they were uh that they were going to try to talk women out of an abortion. Uh and so they they wanted a name that sounded more neutral. And I think that's that's created a a fair amount of controversy. Certainly um there was uh there was obviously about a decade ago the famous case that originated out of California when California tried to uh or or did actually mandate that crisis pregnancy centers had to post notices of where abortions could be obtained and and uh NIFLA versus Becerra.

SPEAKER_03 1:02:54

Yeah that was the Supreme Court case.

SPEAKER_00 1:02:57

So uh the Supreme Court thankfully struck that down on free speech grounds, but uh that has been a perennial issue of complaint uh for supporters of abortion rights. I think that what I would really like to see would be for the pro-life movement to preempt a lot of that criticism by actually becoming medical care clinics. And I think uh in my own town, the there's a a slight shift in that direction with some licensed medical practitioners moving into uh the site. Here's a crisis pregnancy center that started as most crisis pregnancy centers do, without necessarily a uh registered nurse, let alone a physician, on site, essentially just people uh who care about the pro-life cause, mostly from uh local churches, and coming together and saying, let's let's offer help and care uh and maybe have uh some clothing donations, baby clothing donations, diaper donations, other things that we can offer to women. But that's other than an ultrasound machine, that's that's essentially what what uh a lot of these pregnant these crisis pregnancy centers uh consisted of in their early years. But uh as their funding has, as their fundraising has increased and as the movement has grown, I think it is poised. Some of these crisis pregnancy centers are poised to do more. And if they could truly become medical clinics uh with uh an OBGYN uh on staff, at least uh part-time and with registered nurses there to help, uh, where they could offer more comprehensive medical care, I think they could become rivals to the Planned Parenthood clinics. And I think it would also help uh deflect some of the criticism over names, because if they're if they're called something like women's healthcare uh clinic, then that wouldn't be viewed as deceitful if you really do have trained medical staff, licensed medical staff on site providing genuine medical services. Uh now, if a crisis pregnancy center can't do that, uh I'm a very strong supporter of transparency and honesty. You shouldn't claim to offer what you can't do, what you're not offering. Uh so uh crisis pregnancy centers do need to be upfront uh with both the public and with their clients over what they are and are not able to do. Uh but I think there's there's not necessarily a one size fits all name that will uh do that or not do that.

SPEAKER_03 1:05:35

Yeah, when it comes to non-medical centers, um, they can provide referrals to a medical pregnancy clinic, and then medical pregnancy clinics can just promote their medical services. So I think you know, uh you know, a non medical pregnancy center can provide options, you know, conversations about someone's options, and then they can refer someone to that neighboring clinic who does. Provide those medical services under the supervision of a uh of a licensed medical professional. Um, and so I think they there's yeah, and I think a lot of groups, like you're right, a lot of them start off as a non-medical center because the barrier to entry is lower. And then eventually they they find that in order to provide more more service locally instead of having to do referrals, they need to take that the next step of going medical. And NIFLA and Heartbeat and many other and CareNet have helped a lot of groups take that take that next step in going going medical and providing um direction on how you know how to how to do those, you know, how to make that change. Um let's see. Um would you spot would you speak about the history of Planned Parenthood? And I know we don't and that's probably a long or a big topic, but yeah, what are your thoughts about the history of Planned Parenthood?

SPEAKER_00 1:06:56

Yeah. Um well, it started a little over a century ago with Margaret Sanger. Uh it grew out of what was called the American Birth Control League, and then uh that became uh Planned Parenthood uh Federation of America, uh commonly just called Planned Parenthood. For several decades, it was dedicated to providing birth control and birth control information. It wasn't until the 1960s that any uh Planned Parenthood directors uh publicly started supporting uh abortion, though one of the directors of Planned Parenthood, uh Alan Gutmacher, was uh uh a very early supporter of legalized abortions, and so was talking about that issue even in the 1950s before other most others were. So Planned Parenthood, while it was not an organization that uh that provided abortions or that even engaged in abortion referrals or abortion advocacy for several for the first several decades, was was in a position to provide early leadership for uh the abortion law liberalization movement, which became the uh an abortion legalization or abortion rights movement. So uh it has uh it has certainly long been associated with uh with abortion, and uh for that reason I think it's been a public enemy number one for the pro-life movement for a long time. I think that the pro-life movement uh has tended to uh exaggerate Margaret Sanger's own uh uh interest in eugenics and racism. Not that those are not part of her plan. Uh she was definitely someone who was uh who did support the eugenics movement, but so did uh a lot of people in the 1920s. It was not uh particularly unique to Planned Parenthood. It was a very the eugenics movement was very was very widespread. Uh and things that Margaret Sanger has said about uh did say about race and eugenics, I think um have in recent years embarrassed even some of the Planned Parenthood uh leaders who have tried to distance themselves, certainly, from that part of the part of the history. Um I think in dialoguing with uh people who are associated with Planned Parenthood or who support Planned Parenthood, I think it's probably most uh most productive to uh uh recognize some genuine philosophical differences rather than accuse uh people necessarily of being uh tied to uh a eugenics past, to say instead, okay, well, uh why why do we have a difference of perspective on this issue? What are what are the fundamental beliefs that are that uh would lead uh uh uh people associated with Planned Parenthood to say that uh uh uh that every pregnancy must be chosen for it to be uh chosen and wanted for it to be uh uh meaningful and valuable, uh and uh versus those in the pro-life movement who've tended to see uh uh life as as human life as valuable for reasons beyond just uh the view of the person giving birth. Uh that is uh is there uh is unborn human life uh something of intrinsic worth apart from uh the desires of people to have or not have a child? And that's where I see Planned Parenthood uh uh starting from the wrong foundation from its very beginning, that uh even though Margaret Sanger in the 1920s was not supporting abortion and and repeatedly said that she that she was not a supporter of abortion at that point, the philosophy that she had uh about human life, I think not surprisingly, led Planned Parenthood to become an early endorser of of the idea of legalized abortion, because the the framework from the very beginning was that uh unborn human life is is not something that we uh intrinsic that has intrinsic value and that we and that we would welcome apart from our own just personal desire to have a child. And that that I think from a pro-life perspective is a very problematic foundation.

SPEAKER_03 1:11:33

Wow. Thank you, Daniel, so much for yeah, answering all these questions and for sharing your wisdom and knowledge. Um, yeah, and for those who are listening, uh yeah, if yeah, if you have a question for Daniel, feel free to send it along to the podcast, and I'll I'll be glad to forward it to him or share his contact info. Um but essentially, yeah, we'd we would invite questions about you know, what questions would you have about our pro-life history and this work that we could share or pass on to Daniel? Um and Daniel, one of the questions I like to ask everybody on this podcast is where have you seen God's fingerprints in this pro-life work or this pro-life research? Where have you seen God show up in this space?

SPEAKER_00 1:12:16

Yeah. Well, you know, in some ways it's really remarkable that the pro-life movement has had the impact that it has on uh American society. So we can look at some of its failures, and maybe today we talked about some of those, but it is really remarkable that so many churches from s from such different uh theological traditions across the Christian spectrum have united on on the principle that uh that unborn life is sacred, that that uh people who uh who are created in the image of God uh need to be honored, valued, and protected. And so I have seen uh numerous churches uh move uh toward that stance. Uh so if we look at where where Christians were 50 or 60 years ago, uh today we are in a place where uh the the conversation, at least among Christians, uh, has moved much more toward a life-affirming perspective. And so I I see God uh at work uh in that that decades-long uh conversation.

SPEAKER_03 1:13:25

Awesome. And one of the primary audiences for this podcast is prancyclinic uh leadership. Um and uh what what would you like to say to Princey Clinic leaders that they may find encouraging?

SPEAKER_00 1:13:39

Yeah. Uh well, I I would say that I think this is probably the most important work uh of the pro-life movement today, uh, at a time where the politics has become rather complicated and and it's difficult to see uh a strategy, uh viable strategy to to significantly uh reduce abortions through uh expanded political advocacy, though I I think you know that work will continue uh go uh going on. The most valuable thing that can happen uh as far as saving unborn lives is probably uh conversations one person at a time. And that's what crisis pregnancy centers are are doing. That's what they've been doing for decades. And I think uh this is extremely important work.

SPEAKER_03 1:14:29

And then going back to that question of what can we you know learn from history, and I know we you know all the variables change, but what you know, if you could make a prediction for like something that we should be aware of that might be coming around the corner based on trends or based on you know how history sometimes repeats itself, um, you know, what's something that we could you know consider or pray about or be try and be prepared for that might be coming down the road based on the pattern that we have in our history here?

SPEAKER_04 1:15:02

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 1:15:03

Well, I think a larger national disrespect for human life is something that uh the pro-life movement needs to look out for, not just on abortion, but on other issues. So the very rapid public shift, public opinion shift on uh right to die uh legislation is something that I think should concern the pro-life movement. I I know there have been pragmatic reasons why pro-life organizations have felt like they needed to focus very narrowly on abortion. This was why some of them uh got into the movement to begin with, and and this is what they feel unites their coalition. But I I think that as the conversation about the national conversation about abortion changes and as other issues also come to the fore, I think if pro-life movement leaders could remember uh the original basis for the movement, which was not, it was never just about abortion. It was always abortion as connected to this larger concern about human life. I think if people could look for uh ways in which they could affirm the value of human life uh in every area, uh whatever uh whatever uh comes up, I think that would be uh uh important. I uh I think uh as we discussed, uh there's uh there are probably some difficult years ahead for the pro-life movement. I think the uh uh the shape of national politics and state politics leads me to think that it will be very difficult for the pro-life movement to uh significantly restrict abortion in states that have all that have not already taken the step toward significantly restricting it. Uh and so a lot of the debate, like the debate between mainstream pro-lifers and the and abortion abolitionists, is taking place around the rather narrow issue of how stringently uh the states that already have restrictive abortion policies should try to make their abortion laws. So uh in areas where uh abortion abolitionist uh equal protection acts were introduced, those those are states like South Carolina and Idaho that already have some of the strictest abortion laws in the nation. And uh unfortunately, if the pro-life movement is caught up in that debate, uh how do you uh how do you reiterate your ban on abortion in a state that's already banned it? Uh that's uh that's maybe not uh a very productive place to be. I can understand why people in those states would feel frustrated that they haven't been able to uh, despite those abortion bans, actually stop abortion in their states. But uh what I would really like to see would be a movement that can speak into a larger culture that uh unfortunately uh for parts of the United States will look increasingly like the uh the culture in Canada or Britain, where you uh uh you can expect uh uh neither political party to really want to do much uh on the issue of uh abortion. And so then how do you how do you create a conversation that will lead people toward a more life-affirming stance when they live in a culture uh that is not life affirming?

SPEAKER_03 1:18:19

Hmm. Yeah, me yeah. So I'm uh you know, as you as you talk, I'm thinking about Texas having you know very restrictive laws on having an abortion in certain states. But in those states that have very restrictive laws, there's the abortion pill, you know, is not being stopped in the mail, you know, in the mail, like it is still being shipped in. And and from and for some states, they are surrounded by other states that where the abortion pill can be obtained. So someone simply drives across a straight line and you know, then the the laws change. I'm wondering how what we could learn from the prohibition movement when it came to you know alcohol being outlawed, um, and when it comes to these pro-life states where abortion is being outlawed, but yet they're surrounded by other states, or there's also US mail, and abortion pills can be made to be very small when it comes to being shipped.

unknown 1:19:20

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 1:19:21

Yeah, and unfortunately, the lessons I think are not very encouraging. Uh once you once you move away from uh surgical abortion service, which can be regulated to a certain extent, to uh something as small as the abortion pill, uh it's it's much more difficult to to prevent that uh from from moving across borders. And certainly prohibition was a case in point, uh both during prohibition and then also in the decades after that, where uh for several decades there were states and then after that counties that were dry. And in general, dry counties did not uh find it very easy to restrict uh alcohol uh in their county. They could restrict its open sale, but they couldn't restrict people from bringing it in, just as is the case more recently, of course, with marijuana. Marijuana legalization in certain states made it easier then to uh cross uh for people to cross state lines uh with with that particular drug. So drug drug regulation in the United States has uh uh had it faced some difficult challenges. And if that's where uh abortion regulation moves, which it seems like it is, uh if it becomes something like drug regulation, that's uh not very encouraging, uh I would say, for uh the pro-life movement. Uh and uh in the case of drugs, even uh the threat of draconian sentences, which is essentially what the abortion abolitionists are trying to do with the equal protection laws, uh those have not been particularly effective at stopping uh the drug trade. I mean, maybe one could argue that they've had some marginal effect, but even that's debatable. Certainly they haven't eradicated drug use altogether by any stretch of the imagination. And so uh I I think uh uh that's what we would have to realize is likely to happen with uh attempts to stop uh the abortion pill. But uh the the additional hurdle there is uh for a state like Texas or a state like South Carolina or a state like Idaho, even if you were to get majority support in your state legislature to pass uh uh uh an Equal Protection Act, uh, you don't have majority support in the rest of the country uh for that. And so it the the modern analogy would be, you know, suppose there was one state out there, one uh state or a couple of states that had really stringent laws against marijuana while the entire rest of the country legalized this and was just fine with it. And would we expect uh that to necessarily uh work? Well, Mississippi had uh state prohibition on alcohol until uh the mid-1960s. And uh it was not working uh in Mississippi in the uh 30 years after prohibition, after much of the rest of the country had legalized alcohol. Uh Mississippi's state prohibition was not not stopping people from uh drinking by any stretch of the imagination. So uh that leads back to the point about maybe thinking about trying to reduce demand rather than just trying to restrict supply.

SPEAKER_03 1:22:39

Wow. Well, thank you, Daniel, so much for being on here. Are there any final thoughts or you know, things that you'd like to share that I didn't ask you about?

SPEAKER_00 1:22:48

Yeah, well, it seems like we covered a lot of ground. Thank you uh for that. Uh I think I would just uh encourage your listeners to think about the larger question of how we can uh affirm life, that the goal, the goal is not just uh stopping people from having abortions, although obviously abortion uh is of deep concern to all of us, but ultimately why I think we care about the issue is because we care about life. And so anything that we can do to uh to try to uh to affirm that, to encourage it, uh is is uh a worthy measure in this this larger campaign. So thank you. Awesome.

SPEAKER_03 1:23:27

Yeah. So Daniel, would you close our podcast with a prayer, a prayer for our movement?

SPEAKER_00 1:23:33

Sure. Uh Lord, thank you for the opportunity to talk with Jacob about uh uh these important issues. I pray for uh the pro-life cause uh in this country. I pray that uh all of us will who are involved in this work will uh keep the larger picture in mind, will realize that this is about uh protecting people who bear your image. It's about affirming the value of human life that you have created. Uh I pray that we will not get caught up in uh partisan debates and uh get distracted by other things that may uh take us away from being a witness to uh to the world around us. Uh and I pray that as we uh enter a moment where it seems like there's rising uh uh public acceptance of uh abortion and other attacks on human life, at least in in some parts of our country, uh I pray that uh you would give people who are who are on the front lines in this struggle uh the grace to continue. Uh I pray for the crisis pregnancy centers that you would connect them with the people who can be touched uh with the message of of uh life-affirming care. I pray that the pro-life movement will continue to grow uh and that ultimately uh it will be a light uh in this country and in this world.

SPEAKER_04 1:25:12

It's through Jesus that I pray. Amen. Amen.

SPEAKER_01 1:27:23

In the streets of the way, standard me as your eight.