fbpx

The Vital Role of Pregnancy Resource Centers 

Healthcare Rooted in Love

Catherine Glenn Foster

Earlier this year I had the opportunity to testify before Congress for a hearing of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee. I was the sole pro-life witness called to Capitol Hill that spring day, in the weeks leading up to the reversal of Roe v. Wade. I recognized that it was my responsibly to advocate well for our cause, not only for the sake of Americans United for Life, but also because I knew I would be speaking on behalf of all American pro-life moms, dads, and families.

I knew it would be a generally hostile pro-abortion hearing, and I had to do whatever I could to focus Congress’s and the public’s attention on the reality of the humanity of the preborn child, the dignity of every mother, and the threat that is every abortion business to both mother and child.

“The future of America, a post-Roe America, is a future full of hope,” I shared in my opening statement. “Roe’s reversal will make it possible for America’s lawmakers to once more affirmatively protect the human right to life and to enshrine law and policy that makes abortion unthinkable even for those most vulnerable to abortion propaganda.”

“Abortion is fundamentally unjust,” I continued. “Abortion deprives our brothers and sisters of the equal protection of the laws. Abortion turns equals into unequals. Abortion empowers the strong at the expense of the vulnerable. And it makes us all less human and less humane along the way.”

The Role of Pregnancy Resource Centers 

In June, of course, the U.S. Supreme Court finally reversed Roe and rejected its deadly abortion precedents. Although we are still only in the first months of this post-Roe America, and although we undoubtedly have many years left before we achieve the abolition of the scourge of abortion in America, we can be proud in knowing that pro-life advocates and lawmakers are making a difference in states across the country. We are recognizing, in powerful ways, the importance not only of abolishing abortion, but also of the crucial family, community, and state support for mothers and families who desire to choose life.

There’s no question that the organic growth of pro-life pregnancy resource centers across the United States over the past few decades played a major role in persuading the Supreme Court that America’s mothers and families can truly succeed without reliance upon abortion. We must continue to build upon the authentic healthcare responses of pregnancy resource centers now that we are living in this post-Roe era. 

We must give our resources and time to helping centers expand their healthcare services through qualified medical providers. We must ensure that every American mother in every state and in every county has access to a high standard of care like that represented in pregnancy resource centers. And we must establish partnerships across organizations where individuals can receive whatever care they need in life-affirming, loving environments. 

I knew that day on Capitol Hill that pro-abortion members of Congress would attack pregnancy resource centers. I knew the sort of falsehoods I would hear about the so-called assistance offered by Planned Parenthood and other abortion businesses. But I also knew the reality of what pregnancy resource centers provide, and the tragedies that take place every day at abortion businesses. At one point during the hearing, I was asked about the claims of Planned Parenthood and abortion businesses, and where mothers who need help can go.

“When it comes to helping mothers in difficult situations,” I said, “go ask Planned Parenthood if they provide diapers or formula or a crib or rent assistance or food or bill assistance or counseling or mammograms or continuing education and compare that to what pregnancy care centers offer and then come tell me that pro-lifers are the ones who don’t care about children.”

Who Provides Real Healthcare? 

In Washington, D.C., just a stone’s throw from the halls of Congress, the Capitol Hill Pregnancy Center has been doing the rewarding work of serving mothers for years. In fact, it was one of many targeted by the pro-abortion activists from a group calling itself “Jane’s revenge.” Since the fall of Roe, pro-abortion activists have defaced, broken into, and even committed acts of arson to intimidate pregnancy resource centers. I joined the thousands of pro-life advocates who donated to the Capitol Hill Pregnancy Center in response to the attack on their mission and property this summer. They are an organic example of Washingtonians’ pro-life response to our still too pro-abortion culture, and their persistence gives me hope that we will win the hearts of Americans on the truth about abortion and pregnancy-related care.

I often hear pro-abortion activists mischaracterize pro-life protections as if they are threats to reproductive care. Yet, there is no greater threat to reproductive care than Planned Parenthood, where every pregnancy ends with a dead child and a wounded mother and father. 

Those who are truly concerned about reproductive care should be stepping up to support the pregnancy resource center in their communities. It’s at our nearest pregnancy resource center that we should expect to find real reproductive care, real compassion, real options, and real healthcare. 

In this post-Roe era, we look to the successes of the pregnancy resource center movement as a model to emulate. We must speak boldly and courageously about what we all really need—what every child, mother, and father deserve—and that is hope. All of our law and policy focus should be on cultivating cultural norms, nationally and in the states, that make it easier to embrace children as a part of the heroic and noble work of building up families. 

Our pro-life law and policy efforts, most directly through model bills and political and legislative pushes—especially for laws that strengthen pregnancy resource centers—should build up a culture that embraces a spirit of doing even more than laws require, because to be pro-life means being pro-love. In addition, we must continue to give of our time and money in order to enable and support the expansion of existing pregnancy resource centers as they seek to provide more healthcare offerings for vulnerable women and men. 

All true care, and every instance of authentic healthcare, comes, at the deepest level, as an expression of love. We care because we first choose to love. And we love by ensuring the right to life and well-being of every individual.

Catherine Glenn Foster is President & CEO of Americans United for Life, whose mission is advancing the human right to life in culture, law, and policy.

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24