Texas Baptists partners with ERLC to extend ‘culture of life’ to neighboring state
By / Feb 15

The Texas Baptist Christian Life Commission (CLC) and the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) are partnering through the ERLC’s Psalm 139 Project to provide a new ultrasound machine at the Legacy Pregnancy Resource Center in Hobbs, a southeastern New Mexico city that sits just four miles from the Texas border.

Shared commitment to ‘culture of life’

Although abortion was essentially banned in the state of Texas following Roe v. Wade’s reversal and subsequent anti-abortion laws, Katie Frugé, director of Texas Baptists’ Center for Cultural Engagement and the Christian Life Commission, said that the neighboring state of New Mexico remains an option for women seeking abortions.

“We know several abortion-vulnerable women are now traveling out of state to seek services, and we want to help support the crisis pregnancy center in Hobbs as they experience an influx of women in need of support and services,” explained Frugé.

“Texas Baptists proudly affirms the sanctity and dignity of all human life,” Frugé said. “This partnership with the ERLC is the result of our shared commitment to continuing to work to grow a culture of life in a post-Roe world.”

The ERLC added that the abortion industry has targeted Hobbs because of its location and already sees many clients from Texas. With a junior college and a four-year university in the city, Legacy has recently seen an increase in client appointments, averaging about 70 per month. They are excited to see Texas Baptists join forces to resource the city better and provide alternatives to those seeking abortions.

“At the ERLC, we are overjoyed when we can partner with state conventions as we stand for life together. This placement in Hobbs, N.M., in partnership with the BGCT, is unique since the state convention is reaching beyond its borders and giving with a missional mindset to serve their neighbors in an abortion-permissible state,” said Rachel Wiles, director of ERLC’s Psalm 139 Project.

Psalm 139 Project exists to make people aware of the life-saving potential of ultrasound technology in unplanned pregnancy situations and to help pregnancy centers minister to abortion-vulnerable women by providing ultrasound equipment for them to use.

Read the full Texas Baptists article here.

Supreme Court to hear case regarding Idaho abortion ban
By / Jan 10

NASHVILLE (BP) – The Supreme Court will rule on a case involving an Idaho law that bans nearly all abortions in the state.

The high court agreed to hear a challenge to the law, known as the Defense of Life Act, which makes it a felony for doctors to perform most abortions, with an exception for procedures performed when necessary to save the life of the mother.

Last Friday (Jan. 5), the Supreme Court ruled Idaho can enforce the law while the case involving the legislation is being resolved. The court is expected to hear the case in April, and a decision is expected by early summer.

The Friday ruling put on hold a lower court ruling which blocked the Idaho law, based upon a lawsuit filed by the Biden administration.

Brent Leatherwood, president of the SBC’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC), said the lawsuit filed by the Biden administration against the state of Idaho is a wrongful “twist” of federal law seeking to “thwart” the state’s legislation.

Despite what some activists and parts of culture want you to believe, abortion is not health care. In fact, it turns the entire notion of health care on its head. Equally alarming are those who, in the furtherance of abortion, seek to twist federal law to mandate that doctors violate their conscience in the medical care they provide. All of this is preposterous, and the Supreme Court should see through this backdoor attempt by the Biden Administration to thwart Idaho’s ‘Defense of Life’ state law.

Emergency room doctors are more than capable of quickly managing life-threatening situations for mothers like ectopic pregnancies with the utmost care. But they should never be forced to perform elective abortions that terminate the life of a preborn child. The Supreme Court’s decision to review this case is potentially a positive step to both uphold a state’s action to protect life and rebuke the federal government for doing Planned Parenthood’s bidding.

Brent Leatherwood

In a similar case, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently determined that ER physicians in Texas were not required to perform emergency abortion care under EMTALA, in a decision announced just days before the high court agreed to rule on Idaho’s law barring abortion.

Leatherwood noted the importance of continuing to fight for the pro-life cause amid these ongoing legal battles.

It is imperative for all of us who care about the lives of preborn children, their mothers and families to make it clear that abortion is wrong, and the ability to end a defenseless life is no freedom at all.

Brent Leatherwood

Read the full Baptist Press article here.

What is pro-life ministry like one year after Dobbs?
By / Jun 21

A year ago this week, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and drastically altered access to abortion in our nation. Millions of pro-life activists had worked and prayed for this moment. Yet, the nature of the ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson’s Women’s Health Organization didn’t outlaw abortion; it sent the decision-making back to the states, setting off a chain of events, some positive and life-saving, some predatory and destructive.

In my life, I have had the opportunity to live in a few different cities, in different states, each with their own culture. I was able to build relationships with pregnancy care providers in these places, visit their clinics, and support their sacrificial, God-honoring work. Every person I know that has worked in a pregnancy care center is a devoted Christian, a deep well of empathy, and a dynamic problem solver who has walked with many people through unimaginable circumstances.

As we recognize the anniversary of the monumental Dobbs case, we talked to two heroes who have provided a view of pro-life ministry in Tennessee and Illinois. It’s staggering to consider how different their experience has become. 

  • Andrew Wood is the executive director of Hope Resource Center in Knoxville, Tennessee. He hosts a weekly podcast, “A Conversation on Life,” and often speaks and writes on the issue of life around the country. The Hope Resource Center is a cost-free healthcare center for women offering medical care by licensed professionals for reproductive health concerns, education, and connection with community resources. 
  • Kathy Lesnoff worked as a medical assistant in an abortion clinic and is now the president/CEO of Mosaic Health. She currently oversees a staff of 12 with offices in Granite City and Fairview Heights, Illinois, just outside the city of St. Louis, Missouri. They also oversee a mobile medical unit parked next door to Planned Parenthood in Fairview Heights.

This article will provide a portrait of today’s varied abortion landscape, as well as inspire churches and individuals in every community to consider how they might join in supporting mothers and families in new ways. 

Jill Waggoner: How did the Dobbs decision affect access to abortion in your area? 

Andrew Wood: My home state of Tennessee passed the “Human Life Protection Act” in 2019 and a “Heartbeat Bill” in 2020. The Dobbs decision on June 24, 2022, allowed for these bills to immediately make a difference across Tennessee. The reality on the ground here in Knoxville and across the state, however, was felt as the abortion providers quickly closed their doors or altered drastically the services they provided after the Dobbs decision. 

Kathy Lesnoff: Illinois has long been considered a “sanctuary state” for abortion. However, the Dobbs decision took this idea to a whole new level. As many states across the nation proceeded to pass laws that made abortion illegal or severely limited, Illinois opened three more abortion facilities along border cities. Additionally, Planned Parenthood launched a mobile medical unit for the sole purpose of providing abortions along state lines, thereby providing even more access to abortion in Illinois.

JW: How have abortion pills by mail or abortion tourism affected the families you serve? 

AW: We are well aware that women in Tennessee are seeking abortion pills via the mail and are even traveling across state lines into bordering states to access abortion providers that are unavailable in Tennessee. This awareness has prompted partnerships and cooperation with other pregnancy centers in bordering states so that we can assist and provide care for men and women that may be making that drive in one direction or another. We believe that these partnerships will only foster better environments to serve our patients. 

KL: Over 54% of abortions are now medical. Women are opting for the pill as they feel it is an easier option with less guilt attached. To meet this increased demand, more pregnancy centers, including Mosaic Health, are offering abortion pill reversal.

Mosaic has seen multiple patients from other states whose travel has been covered by their employer. We have witnessed an increase in abortion tourism as license plates from over 30 states were seen at a local abortion facility just last year alone.

JW: How has the abortion culture of your state changed since Dobbs? 

AW: Laws can certainly make a difference, but you don’t change the culture overnight with a piece of legislation. Abortion was the law of the land for five decades in this country and, although a giant shift was made via Dobbs, there is still much work to do in cultivating a ethic with a high value of life. 

In Tennessee, we have been successful in legislating a decline in abortion, and the state should be applauded for that, but we haven’t stopped there. We have also started the process of eliminating obstacles to parenting, fostering environments to allow for families to flourish, and are looking at ways to see public and private partnerships work together to better serve families in need. These partnerships and this work is designed to prevent unplanned pregnancies from ever becoming crisis pregnancies. 

KL: Mosaic Health’s Mobile Medical Unit (MMU) is parked by Planned Parenthood six days a week. Since the Dobbs reversal, we have seen a 72% increase in women seeking an abortion on the MMU. The Dobbs decision incited even more anger from the pro-choice left, and they have been motivated to stop pro-life efforts at all costs. Senate Bill 1909 is evidence of their determination to stop pregnancy centers from providing free, confidential services across the state of Illinois.

JW: How have your client numbers been in the last year? 

AW: We have certainly seen an increase of patients since June 24, 2022. This increase was not unexpected as we knew the abortion landscape would shift if and when Roe was overturned. Year after year we saw a 17% increase in pregnancy test appointments, and we provided more ultrasounds in 2022 than we had the previous six years. Unplanned pregnancy doesn’t take a holiday because of court decisions, new legislation, or pandemics. We have served for 26 years in Knoxville and have witnessed this firsthand year in and year out. 

KL: Since the Dobbs case leak, we have seen a 64% increase across all three of our locations in women considering abortion compared to the previous year.

JW: What are you hearing from the women that come to your center? What is new, and what is the same? 

AW: Our patients are looking for assistance. Some of them are not even aware a court decision was made or a law passed in Tennessee. Others are very aware of the options in front of them, the timelines they must adhere to if they are seeking to travel out of state, and what each state offers in terms of abortion services. 

We are also seeing some women feel a sense of freedom now that abortion is not an option in Tennessee. In the past, they have felt a burden or as if abortion was being thrust upon them due to their circumstances. They feel very different now that abortion has been removed, at least in Tennessee, from their decision-making process. 

Unfortunately, we are also hearing from patients that are getting little to no follow-up care after traveling out of state for an abortion. This lack of care is frustrating as women are forced to walk through these difficult days and decisions alone and with no oversight from the very ones that provided them with the abortion in the first place. 

KL: What is new is the urgency with which many want to have an abortion and as mentioned previously, the interest in the abortion pill. Many more women know there are gestational time limitations for the abortion pill. Also new is the amount of gender-confused patients we are serving.

What remains the same is that women are convinced abortion is the best option for their future. They are emboldened to choose abortion and empowered by the self-centeredness of the current culture.

JW: What do you see as the greatest need from churches and other pro-life partners in the coming days? 

AW: I have often answered this question with material needs. This need will never go away. However, I think our greatest need today is discipleship. We need a smooth onramp for our patients to get connected to the local church. We need our patients to be discipled by godly women. We need our patients’ significant others to be discipled by godly men. 

We hold to a high value of life in our pregnancy centers because God created life. In the same way, we hold a high value of marriage and parenthood. Our culture is good at detaching these good and godly things from each other. We shouldn’t be surprised when the next generation lives out this detached life as they are attending more baby showers than wedding showers. The answers our patients are seeking aren’t going to be found in the culture of detachment. Instead, the answer is found in Scripture, which is taught, discussed, and lived out in the local church. 

It is my prayer that pregnancy centers across this country would have church partners lined up seeking to assist, certainly, in material needs, but more importantly in the discipleship of men, women, and babies who are making their way to thousands of pregnancy centers every single day. 

Imagine that in 10 years this onramp from the pregnancy center to the local church is flourishing with families that value God, life, marriage, and parenthood. I believe this partnership is the key to the trajectory shift we so desperately need in today’s society. We must not divorce the life issue from the Great Commandment (Love God and love your neighbor) and the Great Commission (go and make disciples.) Once we understand this, we will be well positioned to serve, love, and disciple those in need. 

KL: The greatest need from churches is a boldness to proclaim the truth regarding the life issue from the pulpit. We are seeing an increased number of women claiming to be Christians choosing abortion. We need godly leadership and voices who are unafraid to share the value of life from conception to natural death with their congregations.

We also need prayer: 

  • prayer that the hearts and minds of those coming through our doors will change, 
  • prayer for our staff and volunteers who are engaging in a battle of life and death every day, 
  • and prayer for the culture of death in our state to transform into a culture of life. 

We believe that God hears and answers prayer.

And we need financial partnership. It would be impossible to operate a single ultrasound machine, pay nursing staff, and offer free pregnancy tests without the financial support of generous churches and individuals throughout our community. For Mosaic Health, the past 37 years has been a testament to how unified, life-affirming advocates can transform people and save lives for generations of families to come.

The Twin Frontiers of Abortion in a Post-Dobbs World
By / Jan 5

In 2020, “medication” abortion—abortion via pills rather than surgery—accounted for the majority of all United States abortions for the first time in the pills’ 20-year history.1

Reinforcing access to these medication abortions was one of the Biden administration’s first responses to the fall of Roe. President Joe Biden “directed the Secretary of Health and Human Services to identify all ways to ensure that mifepristone [one of the two drugs used in pill-based abortions] is as widely accessible as possible”2 in the very same statement in which he asserted a right to engage in interstate abortion trafficking.3 

These are the emergent twin frontiers of the pro-life legal battle: abortion pills and abortion trafficking. 

These abortions aren’t as “safe and effective” as they’re made out to be, either.4 Abortion pills are four times more likely to land vulnerable mothers in the emergency room than first-trimester surgical abortions.5 Surgical abortions pursued out-of-state can be risky, too, as the side effects can be severe for mothers. Women undergoing out-of-state abortions risk being stranded away from family or friends while they suffer potentially extreme pain, bleeding, 6 grief, or anxiety.7

However, these two abortion strategies have become the preferred ways for the federal government and regulatory agencies to advance abortion after the Dobbs ruling—thereby hampering pro-life legislators at the state level.8 

The text of the Dobbs decision was clear: the court sought ultimately to allow “each State to address abortion as it pleases.”9 It specifically rendered judgment that no “right to abortion” is derived from the U.S. Constitution. 

In other words, while it was a tremendous pro-life victory that allows elected officials to make laws protecting children in the womb, Dobbs emphatically did not end abortion in the United States. Much of the fight to protect vulnerable little ones remains with us.

Remembering why we advocate for abortion’s end

That’s why it is essential that legislators, activists, and Christians remember why we “address” abortion at all: to end the ongoing massacre of innocent, human life in the womb. 

As early as six weeks,10 a heartbeat of about 110 BPM is detectable in the womb—no matter how hard pro-abortion activists may fight to revise longstanding, uncontroversial medical consensus.11 By 12 weeks, all of the little human’s major body systems are present and reflexes begin to develop.12 At 18 weeks, children can hear their mothers’ heartbeat.13 In the last trimester, they can taste—and smile or grimace at—the flavors of the food their mother eats.14

This is not simply a political or campaign issue. This is not just the states’ legal responsibility. This is the gravest human rights abuse in our society. These are children. They always have been and always will be. Children were at the heart of the pro-life movement from its inception—as individuals sought to protect these vulnerable neighbors from the abortion provider’s hand—and they remain there to this day.

A legislation rundown

Yet there is legislation on the books in aggressively pro-abortion states to expand the legal killing of these children. Seven states have no gestational limit on abortion whatsoever,15 and another 26 states16 only limit abortions at or around the point of “fetal viability,” generally between 22 and 24 weeks.17

Given the fact that 91% of U.S. abortions occur in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy,18 viability protections translate into unrestricted abortion access for the vast majority of women who desire an abortion. In other words, many of the children who may have been killed under Roe may also be killed under Dobbs.

The state-level response to Dobbs is varied, and a range of pro-life strategies are before the courts at this very moment.Thus far, six states responded by introducing “personhood amendments,” amendments to their state constitution that would permanently enshrine the human child in the womb as a legal person.19 The Dobbs decision explicitly sidestepped the question of fetal personhood, so these amendments—and the litigation battles they spawn—are breaking new legal ground.20

Other states, like Missouri, are exploring protecting children from abortion traffficking.21 Following a model like Texas’ novel S.B. 8 law, Republican Missouri Rep. Mary Coleman introduced legislation that would allow private citizens to sue anyone they knew had pursued an out-of-state abortion.22 

Additionally, 19 states required abortion pill providers be present for the administration of the first dose, making out-of-state “telemedicine” in these cases effectively illegal.23 Part of this provider requirement is often a guarantee of emergency care for women undergoing “self-managed” abortions—a surprising stipulation if they are in fact as safe as proponents make them out to be.24

However, international providers are untouchable by current federal regulation.25 One such provider, Aid Access, is based in Europe and provides medical abortions to Americans in states where life is protected.26 It’s run by a pro-abortion activist and was actively pursued by the Trump administration’s FDA for providing “unapproved” forms of the drugs used in medical abortion, but continues providing abortions-by-mail to this day.27 Aid Access claimed it received more than 10,000 requests for the abortion pill regimen in the week after the Dobbs decision.28 

International pills pose deep and dangerous risks for women who may not have consulted their own doctor who knows their medical history. An incorrect dose could lead to a hemorrhage, for example, or if a woman is Rh negative and doesn’t receive Rhogam at the time of her abortion, she could be putting herself at serious risk in future pregnancies. 

The work before us 

The future of the pro-life movement is growing much more complex. We are not merely fighting to protect women and children from a badly-reasoned 1973 Supreme Court precedent. We are fighting to defend them against international activists, other states, domestic activists, and even the current administration. Addressing the use or expansion of abortion pills and abortion trafficking, in all their forms, will become essential as we seek to protect human life in the womb in America. 

But there is another side to this picture. Legally protecting children in the womb alone fails to address the very real and pressing needs of vulnerable mothers all over the nation who are in desperate need of material, emotional, and social support. So—as voters, as members of the pro-life movement, and as Christians—we must rally around women, as well. 

We need to find a way to restore motherhood to its rightful status as a role to be celebrated, cherished, and protected. 

It will take charity, humility, and tireless work from all parts of the pro-life movement in order to do so: part legislative, part community-based, part spiritual ministry, and part prayer. 

But it is possible. And it is imperative that we work to realize it. Millions of children in the womb and their mothers depend upon us, now more than ever. The legacy of the pro-life movement hangs in the balance, and we cannot afford to lose momentum or clarity.

So work and pray. Pray in gratitude for each life rescued by existing abortion restrictions, many enacted by the Dobbs decision. And work fervently to rescue children in the many states where their lives are not yet protected or valued. The very fabric of our society depends upon it. 

View the latest issue of Light magazine here.

Pursuing a Culture of Life
By / Dec 27

The Twin Frontiers of Abortion in a Post-Dobbs World
By / Dec 27

In 2020, “medication” abortion—abortion via pills rather than surgery—accounted for the majority of all United States abortions for the first time in the pills’ 20-year history.1https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2022/02/medication-abortion-now-accounts-more-half-all-us-abortions

Reinforcing access to these medication abortions was one of the Biden administration’s first responses to the fall of Roe. President Joe Biden “directed the Secretary of Health and Human Services to identify all ways to ensure that mifepristone [one of the two drugs used in pill-based abortions] is as widely accessible as possible”2https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/06/24/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-actions-in-light-of-todays-supreme-court-decision-on-dobbs-v-jackson-womens-health-organization/ in the very same statement in which he asserted a right to engage in interstate abortion trafficking.3https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/06/24/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-actions-in-light-of-todays-supreme-court-decision-on-dobbs-v-jackson-womens-health-organization/ 

These are the emergent twin frontiers of the pro-life legal battle: abortion pills and abortion trafficking. 

These abortions aren’t as “safe and effective” as they’re made out to be, either.4https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/abortion/it-still-legal-me-get-abortion Abortion pills are four times more likely to land vulnerable mothers in the emergency room than first-trimester surgical abortions.5https://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/new-study-finds-chemical-abortion-leads-to-higher-rate-of-er-visits/ Surgical abortions pursued out-of-state can be risky, too, as the side effects can be severe for mothers. Women undergoing out-of-state abortions risk being stranded away from family or friends while they suffer potentially extreme pain, bleeding, 6https://cspregnancycenter.com/side-effects-of-abortion.htm grief, or anxiety.7https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6207970/

However, these two abortion strategies have become the preferred ways for the federal government and regulatory agencies to advance abortion after the Dobbs ruling—thereby hampering pro-life legislators at the state level.8https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf 

The text of the Dobbs decision was clear: the court sought ultimately to allow “each State to address abortion as it pleases.”9https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/is-it-legal-to-travel-for-abortion-after-dobbs It specifically rendered judgment that no “right to abortion” is derived from the U.S. Constitution. 

In other words, while it was a tremendous pro-life victory that allows elected officials to make laws protecting children in the womb, Dobbs emphatically did not end abortion in the United States. Much of the fight to protect vulnerable little ones remains with us.

Remembering Why We Advocate for Abortion’s End

That’s why it is essential that legislators, activists, and Christians remember why we “address” abortion at all: to end the ongoing massacre of innocent, human life in the womb. 

As early as six weeks,10https://lozierinstitute.org/science-at-6-weeks-unborn-babys-heart-rate-is-approximately-98-beats-per-minute/ a heartbeat of about 110 BPM is detectable in the womb—no matter how hard pro-abortion activists may fight to revise longstanding, uncontroversial medical consensus.11https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/2022/september/a-flat-out-lie-doctor-dismantles-stacey-abrams-viral-claim-that-theres-no-such-thing-as-a-heartbeat-at-six-weeks By 12 weeks, all of the little human’s major body systems are present and reflexes begin to develop.12https://www.thebump.com/pregnancy-week-by-week/12-weeks-pregnant At 18 weeks, children can hear their mothers’ heartbeat.13https://www.healthline.com/health/pregnancy/when-can-a-fetus-hear In the last trimester, they can taste—and smile or grimace at—the flavors of the food their mother eats.14https://www.insider.com/babies-smiled-at-carrots-grimaced-at-kale-taste-womb-study-2022-9

This is not simply a political or campaign issue. This is not just the states’ legal responsibility. This is the gravest human rights abuse in our society. These are children. They always have been and always will be. Children were at the heart of the pro-life movement from its inception—as individuals sought to protect these vulnerable neighbors from the abortion provider’s hand—and they remain there to this day.

A Legislation Rundown

Yet there is legislation on the books in aggressively pro-abortion states to expand the legal killing of these children. Seven states have no gestational limit on abortion whatsoever,15https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/us/abortion-laws-roe-v-wade.html and another 26 states16https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/us/abortion-laws-roe-v-wade.html only limit abortions at or around the point of “fetal viability,” generally between 22 and 24 weeks.17https://www.insider.com/guides/health/reproductive-health/fetal-viability

Given the fact that 91% of U.S. abortions occur in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy,18https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/filer_public/99/41/9941f2a9-7738-4a8b-95f6-5680e59a45ac/pp_abortion_after_the_first_trimester.pdf viability protections translate into unrestricted abortion access for the vast majority of women who desire an abortion. In other words, many of the children who may have been killed under Roe may also be killed under Dobbs.

The state-level response to Dobbs is varied, and a range of pro-life strategies are before the courts at this very moment.Thus far, six states responded by introducing “personhood amendments,” amendments to their state constitution that would permanently enshrine the human child in the womb as a legal person.19https://time.com/6191886/fetal-personhood-laws-roe-abortion/ The Dobbs decision explicitly sidestepped the question of fetal personhood, so these amendments—and the litigation battles they spawn—are breaking new legal ground.20https://time.com/6191886/fetal-personhood-laws-roe-abortion/

Other states, like Missouri, are exploring protecting children from abortion traffficking.21https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/abortion-travel-bans-emerge-as-next-frontier-after-roes-end Following a model like Texas’ novel S.B. 8 law, Republican Missouri Rep. Mary Coleman introduced legislation that would allow private citizens to sue anyone they knew had pursued an out-of-state abortion.22https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/abortion-travel-bans-emerge-as-next-frontier-after-roes-end 

Additionally, 19 states required abortion pill providers be present for the administration of the first dose, making out-of-state “telemedicine” in these cases effectively illegal.23https://abcnews.go.com/Health/abortion-pill-restricted-state-bans/story?id=86069230 Part of this provider requirement is often a guarantee of emergency care for women undergoing “self-managed” abortions—a surprising stipulation if they are in fact as safe as proponents make them out to be.24https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/european-doctor-prescribes-abortion-pills-u-s-women-over-internet-n1012676 

However, international providers are untouchable by current federal regulation.25https://abcnews.go.com/Health/abortion-pill-restricted-state-bans/story?id=86069230 One such provider, Aid Access, is based in Europe and provides medical abortions to Americans in states where life is protected.26https://abcnews.go.com/Health/abortion-pill-restricted-state-bans/story?id=86069230 It’s run by a pro-abortion activist and was actively pursued by the Trump administration’s FDA for providing “unapproved” forms of the drugs used in medical abortion, but continues providing abortions-by-mail to this day.27https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/european-doctor-prescribes-abortion-pills-u-s-women-over-internet-n1012676 Aid Access claimed it received more than 10,000 requests for the abortion pill regimen in the week after the Dobbs decision.28https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/03/health/abortion-pill-access-roe-v-wade.html 

International pills pose deep and dangerous risks for women who may not have consulted their own doctor who knows their medical history. An incorrect dose could lead to a hemorrhage, for example, or if a woman is Rh negative and doesn’t receive Rhogam at the time of her abortion, she could be putting herself at serious risk in future pregnancies. 

The Work Before Us 

The future of the pro-life movement is growing much more complex. We are not merely fighting to protect women and children from a badly-reasoned 1973 Supreme Court precedent. We are fighting to defend them against international activists, other states, domestic activists, and even the current administration. Addressing the use or expansion of abortion pills and abortion trafficking, in all their forms, will become essential as we seek to protect human life in the womb in America. 

But there is another side to this picture. Legally protecting children in the womb alone fails to address the very real and pressing needs of vulnerable mothers all over the nation who are in desperate need of material, emotional, and social support. So—as voters, as members of the pro-life movement, and as Christians—we must rally around women, as well. 

We need to find a way to restore motherhood to its rightful status as a role to be celebrated, cherished, and protected. 

It will take charity, humility, and tireless work from all parts of the pro-life movement in order to do so: part legislative, part community-based, part spiritual ministry, and part prayer. 

But it is possible. And it is imperative that we work to realize it. Millions of children in the womb and their mothers depend upon us, now more than ever. The legacy of the pro-life movement hangs in the balance, and we cannot afford to lose momentum or clarity.

So work and pray. Pray in gratitude for each life rescued by existing abortion restrictions, many enacted by the Dobbs decision. And work fervently to rescue children in the many states where their lives are not yet protected or valued. The very fabric of our society depends upon it. 

  • 1
    https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2022/02/medication-abortion-now-accounts-more-half-all-us-abortions
  • 2
    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/06/24/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-actions-in-light-of-todays-supreme-court-decision-on-dobbs-v-jackson-womens-health-organization/
  • 3
    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/06/24/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-actions-in-light-of-todays-supreme-court-decision-on-dobbs-v-jackson-womens-health-organization/
  • 4
    https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/abortion/it-still-legal-me-get-abortion
  • 5
    https://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/new-study-finds-chemical-abortion-leads-to-higher-rate-of-er-visits/
  • 6
    https://cspregnancycenter.com/side-effects-of-abortion.htm
  • 7
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6207970/
  • 8
    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf
  • 9
    https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/is-it-legal-to-travel-for-abortion-after-dobbs
  • 10
    https://lozierinstitute.org/science-at-6-weeks-unborn-babys-heart-rate-is-approximately-98-beats-per-minute/
  • 11
    https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/2022/september/a-flat-out-lie-doctor-dismantles-stacey-abrams-viral-claim-that-theres-no-such-thing-as-a-heartbeat-at-six-weeks
  • 12
    https://www.thebump.com/pregnancy-week-by-week/12-weeks-pregnant
  • 13
    https://www.healthline.com/health/pregnancy/when-can-a-fetus-hear
  • 14
    https://www.insider.com/babies-smiled-at-carrots-grimaced-at-kale-taste-womb-study-2022-9
  • 15
    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/us/abortion-laws-roe-v-wade.html
  • 16
    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/us/abortion-laws-roe-v-wade.html
  • 17
    https://www.insider.com/guides/health/reproductive-health/fetal-viability
  • 18
    https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/filer_public/99/41/9941f2a9-7738-4a8b-95f6-5680e59a45ac/pp_abortion_after_the_first_trimester.pdf
  • 19
    https://time.com/6191886/fetal-personhood-laws-roe-abortion/
  • 20
    https://time.com/6191886/fetal-personhood-laws-roe-abortion/
  • 21
    https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/abortion-travel-bans-emerge-as-next-frontier-after-roes-end
  • 22
    https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/abortion-travel-bans-emerge-as-next-frontier-after-roes-end
  • 23
    https://abcnews.go.com/Health/abortion-pill-restricted-state-bans/story?id=86069230
  • 24
    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/european-doctor-prescribes-abortion-pills-u-s-women-over-internet-n1012676 
  • 25
    https://abcnews.go.com/Health/abortion-pill-restricted-state-bans/story?id=86069230
  • 26
    https://abcnews.go.com/Health/abortion-pill-restricted-state-bans/story?id=86069230
  • 27
    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/european-doctor-prescribes-abortion-pills-u-s-women-over-internet-n1012676
  • 28
    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/03/health/abortion-pill-access-roe-v-wade.html

How should pastors minister in the age of abortion tourism
By / Apr 14

As a follower of Jesus committed to a holistic pro-life ethic, from the moment of natural conception to the moment of natural death, I find myself in awe that we are perhaps weeks away from Roe v. Wade being overturned by the United States Supreme Court. And as a pastor of a small church in Studio City, California, an influential neighborhood of Los Angeles, I also realize the ruling likely won’t change much practically for our community in terms of decreasing the number of abortions. 

We live in one of the most progressive pro-choice states, and California is already passing legislation to encourage people to visit our state in order to obtain an abortion in the case that their state outlaws the procedure. These so-called “abortion tourism” policies should be no surprise to anyone familiar with the hold abortion ideology has on our country. So how should pro-life pastors and other ministry leaders in neighborhoods like mine respond to such developments, especially as more vulnerable women in need may be coming to our state? 

What stays the same

In one sense, nothing should change. The calling of a pastor is to help lead his church in obedience to the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18-20) and the Great Commandments (Matt. 22:36-40) in their own context and in their own community. That calling is true whether one pastors in Mobile, Alabama, or Los Angeles, California. And so, when our God describes himself as One who “executes justice for the fatherless and the widow, and loves the sojourner, giving him food and clothing” (Deut. 10:18) and tells his people they should “open [their] mouth for the mute, for the rights of all who are destitute. Open [their] mouth, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and needy,” then it is not difficult to see a part of that calling should be to foster a holistic pro-life culture and ministry within one’s congregation. 

This must include caring for and protecting both the unborn life in the womb and vulnerable women who are seeking help in a desperate time. At our church I try to make it a point to speak to and preach toward caring for and protecting both of those groups. Our tribal political world often only speaks to the need to protect the unborn at the expense of (or ignorance of) vulnerable women, and vice versa. The Kingdom of God never makes such bifurcations. Neither should pastors. The passions in our country around abortion are impossible to change overnight, and progressive neighborhoods like my own will, I believe, only be shifted by the pro-life side through sustained advocacy on behalf of vulnerable women along with their unborn children. 

What needs to change

But in another sense, if Roe gets overturned and more “abortion tourism” policies go into effect in states like California, things should change. Jesus told us to “let [our] light shine before others, so that they may see [our] good works and give glory to [our] Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 5:16). The ending of Roe would give a special, heightened cultural awareness to abortion issues and how followers of Jesus choose to respond. If our non-Christian community sees us respond with disdain toward Californians rather than California’s progressive policy responses, for example, it will likely only cement the tribal divisions around abortion. 

We absolutely should deplore the policy that leads to a holocaust of life, but we should look with compassion on those who are deceived by sin. If they see us respond like the prophet Jonah to the city of Nineveh, pouting in the dirt and bitter that things have not gone the way we desired, we cannot expect that either the unborn nor vulnerable women will be any more protected here. Worse yet would be to stand before our Lord at the end of time in regards to this issue and hear him implore us, “Should not I pity California, that great state, in which there are more than 39 million persons who do not know their right hand from their left?” (Jonah 4:11, changes mine). 

If Roe ends and California enacts more progressive policies to encourage more abortions for those local and outside the state, pro-life followers of Jesus will have a great opportunity to proclaim and show that we are a people who care about every individual affected by an unplanned pregnancy. There will be plenty of tribal culture warriors who, like Jonah, call for fire to reign down on the state. Not so for us, pastor. We must be those who vocally teach our people that the way of Jonah with Nineveh must not be our way. Instead, we must emulate the way of Jesus when he said, “Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest” (Matt. 11:28). We must be the people who compassionately show people that there are options other than terminating the precious preborn life inside of them. And we can do this while graciously advocating for the protection of these lives. 

California pastors like myself can also lead their congregations to take one tangible step together to help such women, whether giving to or volunteering at PRCs (Pregnancy Resource Centers), connecting with already active pro-life organizations, or supporting local foster care and adoption services. And may I humbly submit that we can advocate for our local and state government to enact more fiscal policies that help reduce abortions? Many progressive legislatures will never seek to reduce abortions directly but will absolutely seek to lift vulnerable women out of poverty and situations which make abortion seem like an attractive option. Pro-life followers of Jesus should be able to encourage such legislation if, in the end, it leads to the protection of more life and the formation of more healthy families. 

If we take these overall tactics, then we’ll be on our way to loving our vulnerable neighbor as ourselves, the very way that Jesus, at the cross, has loved us when we were most vulnerable in our sins. 

What is abortion tourism?
By / Apr 5

We’re familiar with the terms “abortion” and “tourism,” but what do you get when you put these two words together? Abortion tourism is travel for the purpose of obtaining an abortion where it’s legal, and it’s not a new phenomenon. Yet, it has continued to evolve as the abortion landscape has changed in the United States. In 1970, prior to Roe v. Wade, New York repealed all laws criminalizing abortion, giving birth to abortion tourism in the United States. Just two years later, and a year before the Roe decision, over 100,000 women traveled to New York City for abortions, half of whom traveled more than 500 miles to come to a city where they could legally abort their children.

Abortion tourism began to slow when Roe was decided in the Supreme Court in 1973. Abortion was legalized in every state, and the need to travel out of state for abortions decreased. But abortion tourism still wasn’t obsolete. Some states had more restrictive abortion laws than others, so women who found themselves in positions where the abortion they wanted was no longer legal traveled out of state to obtain legal abortions.

Abortion tourism today

But a major shift to the abortion tourism industry began last year when the Texas Heartbeat Act, a law prohibiting abortions in Texas as early as six weeks, went into effect on Sept. 1, 2021. With this law came a rise in abortion tourism. From September to December 2021, nearly 1,400 Texans a month went to surrounding states (Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, and Oklahoma) to have abortions, according to research from the Texas Policy Evaluation Project.

In addition to the procedure itself, abortion tourism comes with expenses such as transportation to another state and lodging while there. So the need to travel for an abortion is merely an inconvenience for some, while it eliminates the possibility of having an abortion for others. For women who don’t have a working car, can’t get time off work, or don’t have anyone to watch their kids, traveling out of state for an abortion becomes much more challenging, and sometimes impossible. Companies such as Citigroup are already supporting abortion tourism by offering to cover travel costs for U.S.-based employees seeking an abortion, and Lyft and Uber both announced last year that they would cover any legal fees drivers face for serving as a ride for women to an abortion clinic.

With this rise of abortion tourism, comes an increase of tourism to out-of-state pregnancy resource centers. Women searching for abortion clinics in a neighboring state have stumbled across pregnancy resource centers and traveled hundreds of miles to get there. While this is an incredible opportunity for these PRCs, it also presents challenges for these centers which are designed around the concept of community and walking with women and families to provide them the support they need to choose life.

Abortion tourism in the future

Now, the Roe v. Wade decision is being challenged at the Supreme Court with a Mississippi abortion case called Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. If the Supreme Court rules to overturn Roe, the abortion tourism landscape could shift once again. While the market may increase if the court decision allowed abortion to became illegal in some states, traveling to obtain an abortion would also likely become a greater barrier to abortion for women.

If the Supreme Court overturns Roe, individual states will be free to make their own decisions on abortions. Many states have laws in place that would automatically either protect or prohibit abortion access. Particularly, if abortion becomes illegal in several Southern and Midwestern states, such laws would cause abortion clinics to close in wide swaths, increasing a woman’s average driving distance to the nearest abortion clinic from 35 miles to 280 miles. And the clinics they could access for legal abortions would likely be overwhelmed with patients.

Even if the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs allows states to make abortion illegal, abortions will continue in other states that welcome abortion tourists with open arms. States like New York are preparing for the new wave of abortion tourism that could come if Roe is overturned. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul has promised that New York will welcome women into their abortion clinics who can’t have abortions in their home states — much like they did in the early 1970s. 

As more states rightly establish pro-life laws, which would make abortions more challenging both for women seeking abortions and clinics providing abortions, churches need to prepare to help make abortions unthinkable and unnecessary – both through advocacy and care. Let’s pray that God would advance pro-life laws, soften hearts to choose life, and make our churches a refuge for women with unplanned pregnancies, vulnerable children, and those whose lives have been turned upside down by the abortion industry’s empty promises.