Roe is Finally Gone. What Must We Do Now?
By / Jan 4

I will always remember exactly where I was when the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was officially announced, overturning the Supreme Court’s infamous 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. Dobbs upheld a Mississippi law which severely limited abortion after 15 weeks gestation. Now individual state legislatures would be enabled to decide how the abortion issue would be adjudicated in each state. 

I had prayed many times since 1973 that God would allow me to live long enough to witness Roe v. Wade and its virtual “abortion-on-demand mandate” being tossed on the ash heap of history. I had always been confident that God was going to answer my prayer affirmatively, but it was still indescribably special when it happened. 

I was overwhelmed by intense gratitude to God on behalf of myself and the millions of pro-life advocates with whom I had worked and marched over the preceding half century. We owe so much to the tens of millions of pro-life Americans, living and dead, who gave generously of their time, talents, and finances over many, many years in defense of our preborn fellow human beings’ right to life. I praised God for giving us this great victory for the preborn, and I thanked God for the multitudes of fellow pro-lifers who God used to bring about this victory for a truly righteous and holy cause. 

I have often trembled for my country when I realized how God detests abortions and how harshly he judged child sacrifice in the Old Testament. If God did not spare his chosen people, the Jews, from severe judgment for child sacrifice (Jer. 7:30-32), I knew he certainly would judge America for similarly heinous, pagan disregard for the sacred nature of all human life. 

This year we also observed the 60th anniversary of the convening of the Second Vatican Council. The major reforms in Roman Catholicism initiated by that historic conclave helped forge the cultural rapprochement between American Evangelicals and Roman Catholics that resulted in that powerful pro-life, interfaith alliance. Without that “common cause” and interdenominational cooperation at the local, as well as at the national level, it is extremely doubtful that Roe would have been relegated to an example of truly egregious Supreme Court decision in legal textbooks.

This has been a long journey for me personally. I have been consciously “pro-life” since my sophomore year in high school in 1964. It was in the spring of that year that I had my first “encounter” with what I now know was a 12- to 14-week-old human fetus. One of my classmates had done her biology term project on human fetal development. As part of her project, she had this undeniably human fetus displayed in a formaldehyde container. (Her father was an obstetrician and had provided the fetus.) I was shocked that this little baby boy’s body was stored just casually leaning against the classroom wall until it was time for her presentation. 

From that moment on, I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that each preborn child was a fellow human being and that his or her humanity was undeniable from the moment of conception onward. I believe God gave me that disturbing experience at that early stage of my life in order to help prepare me for the pro-life debate that he knew was coming. Interestingly, just six months earlier, I had committed my life to full-time Christian service and had been “licensed” to gospel ministry.

The task ahead

After a few hours of praising God for allowing us victory in overturning Roe, I focused on the difficult and arduous task ahead. The words of Winston Churchill came to mind. Reflecting on the Allied victory at El Alamein in World War II, the great wartime leader observed, “This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.” 

The pro-life movement has won a significant and necessary victory in returning the abortion issue to the people. Tragically, the last five decades of abortion on demand in America have greatly advanced what Pope John Paul II rightly labeled as the “Culture of Death.” The reality is that Americans remain deeply divided on the issue of abortion. Polling shows that nationwide, the majority of Americans reject abortion after the first trimester.1 Unfortunately, they do not yet see that, according to biblical revelation, and as reflected in the Southern Baptist Convention’s resolutions on abortion, the only exception to making abortion illegal is to save the mother’s life.2 (I personally believe that ultimately we must have a Human Life Amendment to the Constitution to protect all our preborn citizens. However, in a democracy, it will take a great spiritual awakening to accomplish that feat.) Complicating matters further, there are dramatic differences in opinion within the various states, with California, New York, and Massachusetts allowing abortion up to the moment of birth, as opposed to overwhelmingly pro-life policies such as those found in many of the Southern and Southwestern states. 

Now, the pro-life movement must take up the cause in each state, understanding that it still, first and foremost, is a struggle for hearts and minds. The abortion issue is the leading edge of a much more fundamental debate between the culture of life and the culture of death, between a “sanctity of life” ethic versus a “quality of life” ethic, which inevitably is grounded in the answer to the question, “Who and what is a human being?”

For those of us in the pro-life movement, there is no question concerning the fundamental answer to that most consequential question. The Bible has made it clear that every human being is of incalculable value to God because he sent his Son to die for them (John 3:16). Our Heavenly Father oversees and superintends the process of the formation of each new life so that every one of us, from the moment of conception, is the unique, never-to-be-duplicated, human being that God made each of us to be (Psa. 139:13-16).

It was God’s revelation of himself to the Jews in the Old Testament that resulted in the Hebrew civilization being the only culture in the Mediterranean basin that did not routinely practice both infanticide and abortion on demand. This biblical understanding carried over into the New Testament as evidenced by the fact that early in the post-apostolic era (circa AD 130), The Didache—a type of early church manual with catechisms and doctrinal teachings—condemned abortion as unacceptable for Christians in the midst of a Greco-Roman culture where abortion and infanticide were routine.

The pro-life movement in America is at a hinge point in its spiritual and cultural history. “Time” in the historical sense is not equal. Certain times are more important than others. The Apostle Paul said it clearly when he instructed the Ephesian Christians: “See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil” (Eph. 5:15-16, KJV).

In Greek there are two words for time. One word, chronos, denotes time in its chronological, 24-hour-a-day, 7-days-a-week sense. The other word, kairos, is the one the Holy Spirit inspired the Apostle to use here, which signifies time in its strategic, opportune moments. Paul instructs Christians to seize upon these propitious moments, “redeeming” each one for good, because the days are “evil,” which is not kakos or evil as a state of being, but poneros, which is active, aggressive, pernicious evil. 

As we in the pro-life movement go foward, we must understand that we are engaged in spiritual warfare as we seek to rescue as many babies as possible at every step in the process. While our ultimate goal must be to radically reduce legal abortion to the single exception of saving the mother’s life, we should never allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. In the interim, if we find ourselves, by political necessity, having to temporarily compromise by accepting laws that allow abortions at up to 6 weeks’, or 9 weeks’, or 12 weeks’ gestation, etc., then let us covenant together that we will save all the babies we can and then continue in the struggle for hearts and minds, coming back again and again with ever more protections for the unborn. The final goal must always be to rescue as many babies as possible.

Lessons learned

Over the past five decades, those of us in the pro-life movement have learned some important lessons. First, our God is a God of righteousness, but he is also a God of forgiveness and redemption, and we should always couple our condemnation of abortion with the message of forgiveness and healing at the foot of the cross. We must understand that in every abortion there are at least two victims, the baby and his or her mother. We should do our best to always minister to both victims our Savior’s redeeming, healing love.

We must ask God to give us the spirit of the prophet Jeremiah, who, while he condemned the grievous sins of the people, did so with a catch in his voice and a tear in his eye, as he wept over the sins of the people and the terrible consequences which inevitably followed in the wake of their idolatry and wickedness.

Also, wherever possible, we should promote and support Christian women as leaders and spokespersons for our movement. I learned early on that when pro-abortion advocates are forced to debate pro-life leaders who are women, they lose at least half of their arguments when they can’t engage in bashing males for “wanting to control women’s bodies.” 

A picture is worth a thousand words, and we should do everything we possibly can through sonograms and other audio-visual media to present our fellow citizens with the undeniable humanity of preborn babies. One tremendous evidence of this is the astounding success of the Psalm 139 Project, which affords pregnant mothers the opportunity to see sonograms of their babies. We know from those who serve in pregnancy resource centers that the ability to see ultrasound images is extremely important in helping mothers to choose to carry their babies to term. Everything we can do to promote the ministries of pregnancy resource centers across the land should be done. I hope and pray that Southern Baptists will make it our goal to have at least one pro-life pregnancy resource center in every Baptist association in every state in the Union.

And we must do everything we can in word and deed to refute the libel that the pro-life movement is only pro-life from conception to birth. We should make it clear that we are pro-life from conception to natural death and everywhere in between. 

Finally, we should always remember that Jesus commanded us to be salt and light (Matt. 3:13-16). The salt of the law can severely restrict abortions in our country, and we must do so. However, there is a limit to what the law can do. We must also represent the light of the gospel, which transforms hearts and minds. The salt of the law can change actions. Only the light of the gospel can change attitudes. The salt of the law can change behaviors. Only the light of the gospel can change beliefs. The salt of the law can change habits. Only the light of the gospel can change hearts.

Our pro-abortion opponents are not the enemy. They are under the influence and sway of the Prince of Darkness, who is our true enemy. Let us resolve in our hearts to demonstrate the redeeming love of our Savior to all our opponents. As Dr. King so often reminded us, those whom you would change, you must first love! 

View the latest issue of Light magazine here.

The stories of 2022 we don’t want to forget
By / Dec 29

In the modern era of the 24/7 news cycle, it’s easy to begin each day looking for the latest breaking tidbit. The amount of information we all digest is unimaginable to previous generations, and much of what we take in we simply forget. But the people of God are those who are called to ponder and discern (Psa 101:2; Rom. 12:2). As we close the book on 2022, some of the ERLC staff have reflected on the stories that they don’t want to forget because of their significance. Whether they mark truly historical moments, consider important ethical questions, or reflect the priorities of a particular season of life, all are meaningful and help us recognize our deep need for our Sovereign God. May this exercise encourage you to prayerful reflection and humble dependence on the Lord, as well. 

“The invasion of Ukraine is what stands out for me in 2022. A good college friend of mine has served as a missionary there since 2005, so I watched news updates with a personal lens. What I remember being struck by is how it felt like history books had come alive. Studying history you read about past wars and which country invaded who, but you don’t expect (or at least I didn’t) to see that happening in real time. And however doom and gloom the news seemed about Ukraine, there was always an element of hope that sprung up. Whether it was watching Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy post a video on social media about his commitment to stay and fight or a pianist playing her piano in a bombed-out home, hope seemed to remain, despite all the tragedy. This is exactly what I want to focus on as we approach the end of 2022 and the holiday season: hope brought by an incarnate Savior 2,000 years ago will always reign supreme.” – Julie Masson, Director of External Engagement

“One of my favorite stories from the past year has been the emergence of a number of pro-family policies from lawmakers in the wake of the Dobbs decision. That was such a historic moment and the culmination of decades of dedicated advocacy, but it also really opened the eyes of many to the gaps in support for vulnerable women and families. To that end, this summer at the SBC annual meeting, messengers affirmed ‘pro-life and pro-family policies that serve and support vulnerable women, children, and families.’ Over the fall, I worked to develop some guiding principles for ERLC’s engagement on this issue, and I was able to lay out those principles and make the case for our support in this article of ERLC’s Light Magazine, ‘A vision for a pro-family world: Why policies that help families foster a pro-life culture.’” – Hannah Daniel, Policy Manager 

“Earlier this year, I had an opportunity to talk with Gretchen Smeltzer who founded a ministry called, Into the Light, that combats human trafficking. This issue is one that we don’t like to think about and often feels far removed from us. But in reality, many in our country and abroad are being exploited and abused by predators in this horrifying industry. I don’t want to lose sight of the important calling God has placed on our lives as believers to protect and advocate for the vulnerable among us.” – Elizabeth Bristow, Press Secretary

“My daughter was in speech therapy this year because of a delay, so the story, ‘“Parentese” Is Truly a Lingua Franca, Global Study Finds’ hit me at the right time. It says that across the world people, no matter their language, speak to babies in the same kind of cadence and tone. It reminded me of the truth that children are a universal gift from God, and that parenting and the family are a universal feature of humanity.” – Alex Ward, Lead Researcher

“I think of two articles, ‘Is the Lesser of Two Evils the Right Question’ by Dana McCain and ‘What Makes a Vote Moral or Immoral? The Ethics of Voting’ by Jonathan Leeman. I commend them both along the same lines, that as Christians, our standard of righteousness must be weighed and measured by what God says in his word. All other scales of righteousness fail, and as Dana McCain says, ‘When we misrepresent our imperfect choices as truly righteous, we compromise our integrity and misrepresent our Savior before a lost and dying world. We make it harder for the people we’re called to evangelize to believe us about the most important thing—the gospel of Jesus Christ.’” – Mark Owens, ERLC Podcast Producer

“Every day at nearly every turn, we’re faced with new challenges as we are bombarded with content, entertainment, and messages that challenge a faithful understanding of the biblical sexual ethic. It’s easy to feel overwhelmed as we walk through what seems like uncharted territory. But no matter what we face in our ever-shifting culture, God’s design for human sexuality has never changed. The event, ‘Discipling Your Church for a World in Sexual Crisis,’ that we hosted back in June helped remind the Church how we can navigate these challenges with both the truth of God’s Word and design as well as the grace found in the gospel message. We all need to be reminded that our sexuality is not the defining aspect of our humanity, but it is central to what it means to be human.” – Jason Thacker,  Director of the Research Institute and Chair of Research in Technology Ethics

“I have spent many hours over the last year speaking with pro-life leaders in settings both professional and private. Yet, my conversation with Karen Ellison, founder of Deeper Still, brought to the forefront for me the millions of Americans, men and women, who are still dealing with the effects of an abortion years and decades later. She said, ‘There is a huge population of Christians who are abortion-wounded, and they are not talking about it.’ So many of those are anticipating judgment from fellow believers, and I believe the Church must grapple with this reputation. It is my prayer that our churches will do the hard work required to have both a culture of life and a culture of healing, so that they can welcome those in the depths of their brokenness and help them find freedom.” – Jill Waggoner, Content Editor

“I’m not sure how I could ever forget it, but the astounding pro-life victory in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is the story that stands out to me. The overturning of Roe v. Wade was almost 50 years in the making and a reminder that sometimes good, worthwhile work takes years. The victory magnifies the tireless and bold work of so many who were driven by their conviction that God created every individual, no matter how young and helpless, with innate dignity. It reminds me that nothing is too hard for the Lord and that our times are in his hands. It’s a shot of adrenaline in the arm of the pro-life movement that, by God’s grace, will sustain many, many more years of advocating for the preborn and vulnerable moms at the state level. Lest we doubt that our work matters, all we have to do is recall what wonderful things God did through those committed to advocating for the smallest among us.”  – Lindsay Nicolet, Director of Content 

Christians and the Contraception Culture
By / Dec 27

Progressives and proponents of Roe v. Wade have done a lot of handwringing and social media-posting in the aftermath of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Citizens of a democracy like ours will understand that these court decisions have both a legal and an educational role. 

Roe and Doe v. Bolton, for instance, not only legalized promiscuous abortion, they also falsely taught generations of Americans that preborn human beings were merely “clumps of tissue.” Since then, education about what is going on in the womb has been crucial to the pro-life cause. The Dobbs decision provides additional opportunities for education on the profound truth that preborn human beings deserve the protection of the law. But the implications of this reality are far-reaching, providing impetus for reflecting on other, related issues.

Considering early views of contraception

Take the issue of contraception, for instance. From the beginning, and throughout its pages, Holy Scripture advances a presumption in favor of procreation. From the Creation mandate to “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth” (Gen. 1:28), to the celebration of the psalmist that “children are a heritage from the LORD, the fruit of the womb a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the children of one’s youth. Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them!” (Ps. 127:3-5), to Paul’s indication that an example of a widow’s good deeds is “bringing up children” (1 Tim. 5:10), the Bible is decidedly pro-natal (for procreation). Children are to be welcomed, not refused. 

Scripture’s presumption in favor of procreation was not because contraception was unknown in the ancient world. Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) proposed using various natural oils as spermicides. Pliny (23-79 A.D.) encouraged sexual abstinence to avoid pregnancy. Barrier methods, including condoms made of natural materials, date back roughly to 1000 B.C. Despite those methods, Christians mostly avoided contraception until recently, welcoming children as a gift from the Lord and realizing that widespread use of contraceptives would inevitably lead to promiscuity.

Allan Carlson, president emeritus of the Howard Center for Family, Religion, and Society, corrects our collective memory loss about the role of American evangelicals in opposing birth control. He reminds us that American Evangelical Protestants were vocal in their opposition to birth control as recently as 100 years ago, passing laws and strong restrictions on the practice. 

All the same, by 1973—the year the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the abortion laws of all 50 states—American Evangelical leaders had not only given a blessing to birth control; many would come to welcome the Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade as a blow for religious liberty.1Godly Seed: American Evangelicals Confront Birth Control, 1873-1973 (Routledge, 2011), pp. 1-2.

In the early 20th century, at the 1934 annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention, messengers passed the following resolution:

The Southern Baptist Convention hereby expresses its disapproval of the Hastings Bill, now pending in the Congress of the United States, the purpose of which is to make possible and provide for the dissemination of information concerning contraceptives and birth control; whatever the intent and motive of such proposal we cannot but believe that such legislation would be vicious in character and would prove seriously detrimental to the morals of our nation. (Resolution on Birth Control, May 1, 1934, Fort Worth, TX).

Current considerations of contraception

Today, however, even pro-life Christians generally favor certain forms of contraception. Natural family planning (NFP) and barrier methods (condoms and cervical caps) are largely uncontroversial among most evangelical Christians. This seems to be the case because our understanding of the relationship between married sexual intimacy and procreation has been severed and family planning has been routinely embraced.2Blackburn, W. Ross. “Sex and Fullness: A Rejoinder to Dennis Hollinger on Contraception.” Journal of Evangelical Theological Society 58, no. 1 (March 2015): 117-130. Postponing children—whether for finances, finishing school, or after a career is settled—is more the norm than the exception, even among Christians.

The use of non-abortifacient means of contraception is also less controversial because they prevent pregnancy by preventing fertilization. The reasoning is that as long as embryos are not harmed, there is no harm in these forms of contraception. Abortifacient means of contraception (some forms of the contraceptive pill, the IUD, and elective abortion) are increasingly rejected by Christians, and for good reason, namely that they allow fertilization to take place, but force a woman’s body to reject the preborn human embryo or violently remove him or her.

Although it’s right and good to focus on the harm to the preborn, there may be other harms of birth control worth consideration, including the cultivation of a widespread culture of contraception such as the one we currently inhabit. There are good reasons God made our bodies ready to parent earlier rather than later in life. Postponing procreation increases the likelihood of infertility and complications during pregnancy.3L. Schmidt, T. Sobotka, J.G. Bentzen, A. Nyboe Andersen, on behalf of the ESHRE Reproduction and Society Task Force, Demographic and medical consequences of the postponement of parenthood, Human Reproduction Update, Volume 18, Issue 1, January/February 2012, Pages 29–43, https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmr040 Additionally, Mary Eberstadt’s volume, Adam and Eve After the Pill: Paradoxes of the Sexual Revolution, makes a convincing argument that widespread availability of contraception fueled the sexual revolution and its toxic aftermath of social pathologies such as abortion, divorce, cohabitation, and pornography.

Interestingly, a search of the annual resolutions of the Southern Baptist Convention does not find any resolutions on the ethics of birth control per se. Abortifacient methods of contraception and the distribution of contraceptives without parental consent are rightly decried, but whether or not married couples should use contraception is not mentioned at all, presumably because Southern Baptist have left that matter to Christian conscience. 

Important questions to consider 

Perhaps while we are working out the moral and legal implications of Dobbs for abortifacient contraceptives, it’s time for evangelicals and other Christians to rethink their understanding of the relationship of marriage and procreation and what that means for being complicit in an anti-natal (against procreation) culture of contraception. 

In a benchmark essay published in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Christian ethicist Dennis P. Hollinger offers a helpful set of arguments both against and for contraception.4https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/56/56-4/JETS_56-4_683-96_Hollinger.pdf Several important questions to consider emerge from the discussion:

  1. Does the “procreation mandate” (Gen. 1:28) prohibit all forms of contraception?
  2. Does Scripture require that every act of sexual intimacy be open to procreation, or may married couples enjoy other goods of sexual intimacy (e.g., pleasure, union) while using non-abortifacient means of contraception?
  3. Can Christians be welcoming toward children and childbearing and at the same time practice birth control?
  4. The creation mandate to have dominion includes the command to intervene in the world and steward its resources. Are non-abortifacient methods of birth control examples of appropriate stewardship, allowing married couples to determine the number of children they should have based on the providence of God, their stage of life, and the financial and other resources they have?
  5. Might there be special circumstances in God’s providence where it may be dangerous to children who are born in that context (e.g., in a culture hostile to Christianity or where there is not adequate food and water)?

Praying through and answering these kinds of questions will help faithful Christians resist the pressures of the contraceptive culture while following the leadership of the Lord in their own families. As we celebrate, embrace, and care for children, may the Lord use us to contribute to a culture of life in our churches, communities, and throughout the country.

  • 1
    Godly Seed: American Evangelicals Confront Birth Control, 1873-1973 (Routledge, 2011), pp. 1-2.
  • 2
    Blackburn, W. Ross. “Sex and Fullness: A Rejoinder to Dennis Hollinger on Contraception.” Journal of Evangelical Theological Society 58, no. 1 (March 2015): 117-130.
  • 3
    L. Schmidt, T. Sobotka, J.G. Bentzen, A. Nyboe Andersen, on behalf of the ESHRE Reproduction and Society Task Force, Demographic and medical consequences of the postponement of parenthood, Human Reproduction Update, Volume 18, Issue 1, January/February 2012, Pages 29–43, https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmr040
  • 4
    https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/56/56-4/JETS_56-4_683-96_Hollinger.pdf

How Send Relief meets the needs of vulnerable children and families
By / Oct 3

Southern Baptists have a long history of following in the footsteps of the faith and serving those in need. When Jesus was on Earth, he did not bypass physical needs but met them and used them as a way to share how he was meeting the greatest need of all—the salvation of our souls. Likewise, Send Relief, a collaboration between NAMB and the IMB, seeks to address needs that arise from various circumstances while also sharing the hope of Jesus. One focus of the work at Send Relief is foster care and adoption, which is all the more important in a country without Roe. Josh Benton, vice president of North American ministry at Send Relief, answered a few of our questions about this aspect of their ministry and how churches can be involved. 

Lindsay Nicolet: How does foster care and adoption ministry fit within the mission of Send Relief? 

Josh Benton: Send Relief is the Southern Baptist compassion ministry which seeks to meet physical and spiritual needs in Jesus’ name. Working alongside churches, we care for the vulnerable and strengthen communities around the world. Caring for families and children is one of our five ministry focus areas. Our work in this area includes developing and supporting ministries focused on crisis pregnancy, serving at-risk families, and helping churches develop or support ministries to vulnerable families within their communities. 

LN: What projects is Send Relief involved in as you seek to engage in the foster care and adoption space? 

JB: Send Relief engages foster care and adoption in two specific ways. First, is through our ministry centers. We have 20 Send Relief ministry centers across North America. Two of them, Valdosta, Georgia, and Quebradillas, Puerto Rico, are child placement agencies for foster care and adoption. In addition to child placement, these locations provide training for foster and adoptive families. We also work with churches to help support vulnerable families in their communities with resources, counseling, and respite care, along with providing an opportunity for churches to go on mission trips to learn more about and get hands-on experience with foster care and adoption ministry.  

Second, Send Relief helps churches start a Family Advocacy Ministry, which we call a FAM. FAM is a step-by-step ministry strategy that helps churches serve and advocate for vulnerable children and families as well as those called to foster and adopt. Send Relief helps churches implement FAMs so they can have a gospel-centered impact on the lives of vulnerable children and families.

LN: How does God’s Word drive your work in this key area? 

JB: Scripture is clear about the call to care for vulnerable families. Genesis 1:26-27 establishes that all people are created and designed by God, in the image of God, and are therefore valued by God. Genesis 2 describes God’s intentional design for the family. Then, Genesis 3-4 shows the damaging impact of sin on all creation but, specifically, how sin creates brokenness in families. 

From Deuteronomy 10 to James 1 and several references in between, God not only calls his people to remain committed to his design for the family but to also care for the those without stable, intact families. Romans 8 also beautifully portrays adoption as a picture of our redemption through Christ.

With this in mind, we can sum up how Scripture provides the truths that cultivate Send Relief’s perspective on serving in foster care and adoption ministry with a few statements:

  • Every person is created in the image of God, therefore, all people have value.
  • God designed the family and desires all to be in a family.
  • Christ calls us to reflect his compassion and care for the vulnerable.
  • Foster care and adoption portray how God redeems through a personal faith in Christ. 

LN: What challenges arise with serving children in need and families in today’s culture? And how have/will these change in a post-Roe era?

JB: The challenges for serving vulnerable children and families are significant. Here are a few key statistics from Adoptuskids.org and the Administration for Children and Families: 

  • Each year more than 250,000 children enter the foster care system in the United States.
  • At any given time, there are on average over 400,000 children in the foster care system.
  • Each year more than 23,000 children age out of the foster care system when they turn 18 or 21, depending on a state’s laws.
  • Currently, more than 115,000 children in foster care are waiting to be adopted.
  • The average age of a child in foster care is 8 years old.
  • Troubling statistics for children who age out of the system:
    • Likely to experience job loss and homelessness
    • 70% of human trafficking victims spent time in foster care
    • 71% of women who age out experience pregnancy within one year 
    • 65% of individuals who are incarcerated aged out of the foster care system

These challenges will likely intensify in our post-Roe world. These are all harrowing statistics, but one of the most significant issues is that there are more children in need provides an opportunity for churches to fill the gap. With more than 115,000 children in the foster care system who are waiting to be adopted each year, churches can play a role by recruiting families to foster and adopt, mentoring vulnerable families, and providing communities of care for those who are fostering and/or adopting.

LN: How can pastors and ministry leaders create a culture of equipping families to care for children?

JB: No matter what community, city, or state you are in, vulnerable families are present. This isn’t a ministry opportunity that is somewhere else; it’s everywhere. Pastors and church leaders have an important role of recognizing the need that exists, articulating the biblical call to meet the need, and blessing those in their congregation who are led to pursue the ministry opportunity. Send Relief has resources on our FAM page to help pastors and churches pursue ministry to vulnerable families and children.

LN: What are some practical things that local churches can do to come alongside this mission to serve families and those involved in foster care and adoption?

JB: There are several ways churches join Send Relief to serve vulnerable families. One of the most important things is to recognize that there are many ways to serve. There is a great need for families to foster and adopt. Encourage those who are called but also understand not everyone feels that call, and there are multiple ways to serve outside of adopting and fostering. Here are specific ways churches can serve:

  • Praying diligently and consistently for vulnerable children and families
  • Developing a relationship with a local child welfare office
  • Raising awareness about the needs of vulnerable children and families
  • Recruiting families to consider adopting or fostering
  • Providing resources, as well as emotional and spiritual support, to biological families experiencing crisis
  • Helping to meet physical and financial needs of foster and adoptive families
  • Mentoring single mothers
  • Supporting and encouraging local child welfare workers
  • Providing meals or respite care to foster and adoptive families
  • Going on a mission trip at a Send Relief ministry center that serves vulnerable families

For more information on the Dobbs decision and its effects, visit erlc.com/dobbs

Why the (mis)labeling of pregnancy resource centers on Yelp needs to be corrected
By / Aug 29

Yelp announced last week that, in light of the historic Dobbs v. Jackson Whole Woman’s Health case at the U.S. Supreme Court and the continued push by many in society for greater access to abortion services, they would begin to recategorize crisis pregnancy centers (also known as pregnancy resource centers) and other faith-based clinics on their platforms to distinguish them from abortion clinics. They also have placed user warnings on these listings, indicating that crisis pregnancy centers “typically provide limited medical services and may not have licensed medical professionals onsite,” regardless of the reality of what these clinics might offer or the qualifications of those onsite. This announcement was framed in light of Yelp’s ongoing commitment to support “access to reproductive healthcare for our employees, underserved communities, and our users,” as vice president of User Operations, Noorie Malik, wrote.

This relabeling and the user warnings being applied to pregnancy care and resource centers by Yelp comes on the heels of other technology companies such as Alphabet’s Google being pressured by Congressional Democrats to limit the appearance of pregnancy resource centers in certain abortion-related search terms and results. In addition, there are calls to delete location data for those visiting abortion clinics, especially in states where abortion services may be severely limited due to the number of pro-life laws taking affect after Dobbs. In response to the push by Congressional Democrats in June, a number of Republican attorneys general sent a letter in July warning Google not to censor or suppress information about these clinics in search or map results. On Aug. 25, Google announced that it would alter how abortion clinics and pregnancy care centers appear in search results, ads, and on maps.

This particular issue is shaped by a number of significant current debates over content moderation, digital governance, and access to information in our increasingly digital public square. Dobbs has resulted in an unprecedented time of debate, and the predatory abortion industry continues in its long-established efforts to lead women to believe that the only option during an unplanned pregnancy is abortion—at times, even celebrating the practice of the abortion. Now, more than ever, technology companies must not bow to the pressure of abortion advocates, government leaders, and the abortion industry in limiting access to life-altering information for women in crisis. Access to accurate information in order to make life-and-death decisions should be at the very core of these businesses’ values. 

Lack of information

One of the primary reasons that the technology industry has thrived — especially companies like Yelp, Google, and others — is that they give people access to nearly limitless information about things that matter (as well as a host of things that don’t) and help people make informed decisions. Accessing information can range from reading the breaking news to research about various topics to the details about a local restaurant, but it can also be life-saving as mothers in crisis are frantically searching for help with an unplanned pregnancy. One aspect usually left out of these conversations about vulnerable women searching for abortion facilities is that they are routinely under extreme duress and pressure from others to have an abortion regardless of their own choice. Whether it is an abusive or pressuring boyfriend or an embarrassed parent urging the woman to end the developing baby’s life, women in crisis pregnancies need to know where to turn.

Countless users, including women and their families, depend on these services to provide the right information in the midst of these often unplanned and emotional searches for help. This truth is clear, especially in light of the fact many women choose life for their preborn baby if they have access to an ultrasound image of the child in the womb. A vast amount of women have been led to believe by a deceptive pro-abortion industry that killing the baby in the womb is the primary solution in these types of situations. But with advances in technology, especially ultrasound machines, women can now see what they typically already know subconsciously—that there is a living human being growing inside of them for whom they are their only source of support, love, and protection.

While more information does not immediately solve the crisis at hand, nor is information all that is needed, pregnancy resource centers and faith-based clinics are ready and able to assist far more than abortion clinics in caring for women with prenatal, postnatal, and even postpartum services — including options like adoption. These services often include provision of clothes, food, diapers, strollers, and countless other items for women in need so that they can raise their family and care for their children, regardless of financial or material circumstances. On top of this level of holistic care, many of these life-saving clinics are also staffed with trained medical professionals, including technicians with limited OB-training that is required in order to maintain, use, and interpret the results of ultrasound machines.

The real cost of pro-abortion misinformation

Some abortion proponents, including Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, are actively promoting misinformation that these clinics are ill-equipped, lacking medical training, and simply exist to manipulate women into not having the desired abortion. But, as mentioned above, many of these clinics actually do employ medical professionals and offer a host of healthcare services as well as holistic care, as opposed to their pro-abortion counterparts.

For example, Hope Resource Center in Knoxville, Tennessee, offers free pregnancy testing, ultrasound imaging, STD testing, well-woman exams, and pap testing. In addition, the center employs seven medical professionals. But this clinic is currently labeled by Yelp with a consumer notice reading “This is a Crisis Pregnancy Center. Crisis Pregnancy Centers typically provide limited medical services and may not have licensed medical professionals onsite.” While some will argue that this simply indicates the clinic MAY not have licensed medical professionals onsite, it is misleading to apply such a broad label that is designed to introduce doubt in the minds of users, especially if those same notices are not applied to abortion clinics offering substandard care. In an ironic twist, it has been long documented that not all abortion clinics have adequately licensed medical professionals or a full range of medical services outside of abortion. Some clinics employ doctors who lack admitting privileges at local hospitals in case an abortion goes wrong or a woman is in need of further medical treatment after the procedure. This is one reason that Google’s recent announcement about labeling ads and locations as “providing abortions” and not providing abortions is better suited than overly broad labels utilized by Yelp that introduce doubt and confusion rather than provide accurate information.

It is clear that this labeling is one-sided and meant to ensure easy access to abortion while introducing friction for obtaining life-saving information and services.

It is true that pregnancy resource centers and faith-based clinics operate from a particular ideological and religious perspective, just as any clinic or medical professional, including abortion providers themselves. It is a myth to assume that anyone can truly be neutral and simply present information without their beliefs interfering. Our beliefs will always drive our actions, no matter the perspective we come from. And it should be noted that it is abortion clinics who are actually limiting the information available to women and pushing abortion services as the best option for women in crisis. This illustrates that just as Christians ought to unapologetically celebrate the Dobbs ruling and the passing of major pro-life legislation across states, we also must acknowledge that this ruling simply represents the first step among many in combating the abortion industry.

If Yelp and other information providers actually want to provide reliable information and assist vulnerable women, they would not apply misleading labels, delist, or remove this life-saving information from those who need it most. YouTube, for example, decided in late July to update its policies and remove certain abortion-related content and misinformation from its platform, but it appears it did so without pushing a particular view of abortion. Google, likewise followed suit with labeling that brings clarity, not introducing confusion or misleading the public about what clinics may or may not offer. 

Limiting access to information based on partisan and ideological beliefs is the complete opposite of what these companies claim to stand for and support. Given that abortion is on the ballot in many states with mid-term elections coming this November, technology companies must resist the partisan push to remove information and limit the options of women facing these unplanned and crisis pregnancies. Women and their children deserve accurate and honest information, especially as Christians and other pro-life groups seek to push back against the lies and misleading information promoted by the abortion industry in the digital public square today.

What to do when you’re overwhelmed by the world’s suffering
By / Aug 22

This past week, I opened my computer and logged in to Facebook. I read an article about a recent shooting, scrolled past a post about a new virus, and read someone’s account of living with long COVID (long-term effects from the infection). Moving on to Twitter, I skimmed through a heated argument about the Dobbs decision, read news about famine and war, and saw several death announcements. I decided not to move on to Instagram. 

I often feel heavy and overwhelmed after spending time online, and I know I’m not alone. Someone recently shared with me how much he had struggled after reading about the Ukraine war. He saw pictures of a family being separated and began to replay these images in his mind. Lying awake at night, he considered what he would do in a similar scenario. 

Another person described her struggle with anxiety and racing thoughts. She had watched a video of a recent school shooting and couldn’t stop thinking about it. She worried about her own children. She grieved the children who were lost. The thoughts would not relent. 

Constant online access has made us daily witnesses to the grief and trauma of millions of people. Each time we open our internet browsers, we encounter news that forces us to consider issues of political conflict, theological disagreement, global suffering, financial stress, illness, and war. Many people feel a sense of tension. We want to stay informed, but too much information can leave us weighed down with thoughts and emotions that feel too heavy to bear. 

What should we do? Should we attempt to carry the sorrows and burdens of the world? Or should we distance ourselves from other peoples’ suffering to protect ourselves? Perhaps it is some of both. 

Remember those who suffer 

Scripture suggests there is something good and holy about remembering other peoples’ suffering, even when they are physically distant from us. Hebrews 13:3 tells us to “remember those in prison as if you were together with them in prison, and those who are mistreated as if you yourselves were suffering.” We honor people in their suffering by not forgetting about them. Instead of withdrawing from the world, we bear witness to other peoples’ pain and remember them in the same way we would want to be remembered in similar circumstances. 

Remembering often awakens a sense of compassion, which often leads to a desire to act. It might lead us to pray, give money, volunteer, speak up, or push for change. These are all good things. But too much remembering can lead to racing thoughts and anxiety. Overextending compassion can result in compassion fatigue. Giving to the point of exhaustion can lead to burnout. Absorbing too many stories of other peoples’ trauma can result in secondary trauma. That feeling of tension remains. 

Carry your own load 

We can break out of this tension by balancing wisdom from Hebrews 13:3 with wisdom from Galatians 6:5. A few verses after we are told to carry other peoples’ burdens in Galatians 6:2, we are instructed to each carry our own load. 

Recently, I realized that I was trying to carry someone else’s load. This person was experiencing a heavy struggle, and there were some practical ways I could help to carry her burdens. I could listen and ask good questions. I could sit with her in her grief. But I could not fix the problem. There was a depth to her emotional pain that I could not truly, fully understand. Aspects of her suffering could only be carried between her and God. I had to let go. I had to let her carry her own load. 

As we are inundated with stories of global suffering, we may be tempted to carry loads that do not belong to us. We may hold on to a false sense of responsibility that leads us to overextend ourselves in our care and compassion for other people. We may attempt to fix problems and over identify with burdens that were never given to us to carry. 

Cast your anxiety on the Lord 

The other day, after I closed out of Facebook and Twitter and went to bed, my mind remained filled with thoughts about what I had just read. What if I also get long COVID? What do I think about this or that debate? How should I respond to this person or react to that cause? 

Lying in bed, I used a strategy I often teach people who come to me for counseling. I closed my eyes and began to mentally list my concerns. I gave each concern a name and visualized myself writing it down on a slip of paper. The pandemic and fear of illness went on one slip. Images of hungry, displaced people went on another. A political post that frustrated me, a news article about a school shooting, and several death announcements each got a slip. I took each slip of paper and visualized myself placing them inside a box one at a time. I closed the box and remembered that God was right there with me. I handed him the box and prayed a short prayer, releasing my concerns to him. 

In counseling, this strategy is called containment. In Scripture, we see this idea described in 1 Peter 5:7 as casting our anxieties on the Lord. It is a way to set aside thoughts, feelings, and images that feel upsetting or distressing so we can proceed with our day. The goal of containing our thoughts and giving them to God is not to ignore or downplay important issues. It isn’t being selfish, indifferent, or ignorant in the face of suffering. Instead, it is a way to accept God’s care for us. He invites us to trust him by releasing to him the fears, problems, and concerns we cannot solve. 

What people, causes, local issues, and global concerns weigh on you today? Sit for a moment and honor those who suffer by remembering them. Perhaps choose one or two ways to carry someone else’s burdens. But then, let go. Carry your own load, and let your neighbor do the same. Release your anxieties to God. The world is not yours to carry. 

Explainer: What you should know about the increased demand for abortion pills 
By / Jul 29

Demand for abortion pills has increased significantly since the recent Supreme Court ruling that allowed states to put greater restrictions on abortion. Axios reports that organizations that provide information about or access to abortion pill has skyrocketed in the weeks since the Dobbs decision was released. The result is that chemical abortion is likely to become even more common in the near future. Over half of abortions in the U.S. (54%) in 2020 were medication-induced, up from 39% in 2017, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that supports access to abortion.

Here is what you should know about abortion pills. 

What is an abortion pill?

The abortion pill is the most common type of chemical abortion. 

The two broad methods for legal abortions in the U.S. are chemical and surgical. A chemical abortion (sometimes referred to as a medication abortion, medical abortion, or pharmaceutical abortion) is a method that uses an abortifacient to stimulate uterine contractions and end the pregnancy in a process similar to miscarriage. An abortifacient is a chemical or drug that causes embryonic death by either killing the child directly or by preventing implantation of the embryonic child in the uterine lining.

While all abortion pills are abortifacients, not all drugs that have, or may have, an abortifacient effect are classified as abortion pills, which have an abortifacient intent. For example, some forms of “emergency contraceptive” may prevent implantation and therefore cause the death of an embryo, but because their intent is not to cause abortion, they are not generally considered abortion pills.

How do abortion pills work?

The method approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for chemical abortions is a two-step process involving the drugs mifepristone and misoprostol. Mifepristone (brand name Mifeprex) ends a pregnancy by blocking the hormone progesterone, which is needed to maintain a pregnancy. Because this hormone is blocked, the uterine lining begins to shed, removing the child (in the embryonic state) that was attached. The second step, which occurs 24 to 48 hours later, requires taking misoprostol which causes the woman to expel the child and the uterine lining in a matter similar to a miscarriage.

How do abortion pills differ from “emergency contraceptives”?

Emergency contraception—sometimes also known as the “morning after pill”—is a method of contraception that is taken after sexual intercourse with the intention of preventing pregnancy by delaying ovulation (i.e., the process in which a mature egg is released from the ovary).

There are three main types of emergency contraception approved for use in the United States. The first type uses Levonorgestrel (Plan B One-Step, Next Choice One Dose, After Pill, Take Action, and My Way). As with oral contraception, it is unclear whether this drug can ever have an abortifacient effect.

What is Mifeprex (RU-486)?

The most common drug used for medical abortion is Mifeprex, the brand name for mifepristone, a drug that was formerly known as RU-486. The drug was developed in France in the 1980s and banned by President George H.W. Bush Administration’s FDA in 1989. In 1993, President Bill Clinton asked the FDA to review the ban, which was lifted in 2000.

Currently, the drug is approved by the FDA provided it is “dispensed in certain healthcare settings, specifically, clinics, medical offices and hospitals, by or under the supervision of a certified prescriber.” In 2016, the FDA extended the time the abortion pill could be taken to 70 days into a pregnancy. In December 2021, the FDA relaxed some of the rules on mifepristone, allowing patients to pick up the drug at their pharmacy or receive it in the mail.

(Despite how the name might sound—“Are you for 86?” (“86” being slang for ejecting something or someone—RU-486 was derived from the initials of the French pharmaceutical company that patented the drug (Roussel Uclaf) and the serial number (486).)

Is the ‘abortion pill’ restricted by state bans?

It’s currently unclear whether states have the power to restrict abortion pills. After the Dobbs ruling, Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said, “States may not ban Mifepristone based on disagreement with the FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy.”

Greer Donley, an assistant professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, said that Garland’s statement “was really a nod to the idea that state abortion bans theoretically have to have an exception that allows the dispensing of medication abortion.”

According to the Guttmacher Institute, 32 states require that the provider who administers a medication abortion be a physician. If abortion is illegal within a state, a physician licensed within the state would be unable to prescribe an abortion pill. 

How do telemedicine restrictions limit the use of the abortion pill?

Telemedicine is the use of electronic communications and software to provide medical services that are usually offered in a clinic without an in-person visit. The COVID-19 pandemic increased the popularity of telemedicine, and it became increasingly possible to visit a physician by phone or computer and have a abortion pill mailed to one’s home.

Organizations that provide telemedicine in the U.S., however, are subject to state laws. Currently, 19 states require the person (doctor, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant) providing a medication abortion to be present when the patient takes mifepristone. This prohibits the use of telemedicine for the procedure and prevents doctors from other states from prescribing the abortion pill. More states that ban abortion may choose to implement such restrictions in the future. 

However, women seeking chemical abortions in states that ban the procedure are already finding ways to get around the laws. For example, there has been an increase in the use of telemedicine organizations that operate in foreign countries, which are able to circumvent state and federal laws and mail the abortion pill directly to anyone in the U.S. 

Women seeking a chemical abortion may also be able to use telemedicine within a state that allows abortion and have the abortion pill sent to someone they know in the state or remailed from an in-state address to their own home. 

Thus, Christians must work to ensure that they do not confuse the passing of pro-life legislation or the overturning of the precedents in Roe and Casey as the end of the fight against abortion. Important as that is, if people still desire abortions, these pills will be available. Christians must work tirelessly to proclaim the dignity of every human life and address those factors that lead women to consider abortion.

Why Roe is about more than just abortion
By / Jul 21

In the hours following the historic Dobbs decision, which recognized that the states have the right to make laws regulating the practice of elective abortion, moral panic ensued. Almost immediately, pro-choice pundits took to social media and television news decrying the decision by the nation’s highest court and began to sew panic throughout our communities, claiming that the right to abortion represents much more than simply a woman’s ability to choose to end the life of the preborn baby within her.

This same idea was also pointed out by Justice Clarence Thomas in his solo concurring opinion in Dobbs where he stated, “In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” even as the majority disagreed with his assessment. The majority opinion in Dobbs sought to limit the scope of the decision simply to the practice of abortion and the overturning of the abortion precedents set by Roe and Casey. They stated, “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.” Whether one agrees or not with Justice Thomas’ rationale for reevaluating these past decisions, he rightfully pointed out what many on both sides of the debate have long acknowledged: that the right to an abortion was decided upon a tenous reading of the Constitution by the justices, being built upon a discovered right to privacy and a mantra of self-determination that dominates the modern era. 

The reality of this unstable foundation of a right to abortion was even acknowledged by Vice President Kamala Harris who noted in a Face the Nation interview that these protections were wrongly assumed to be secured by the court, never actually being codified by Congress.  As of this week, Congress is seeking to do just that. With the midterm elections in view, Democrats in the House of Representatives have moved beyond bills explicitly focused on abortion and now are looking to codify rights to same-sex marriage and contraception in the law. Though these bills will likely pass the House with bipartisan support, it’s unclear what outcomes they will face in the Senate.

The linchpin

Abortion on demand was a cultural fixture for nearly five decades in America but has always represented much more than simply the taking of a preborn life, since it became the linchpin for the wider sexual revolution rooted in self-determination and moral autonomy. Abortion became sacrosanct for many of our neighbors because it represented the longer trajectory of certain modern ideas that see the individual as the sole arbiter of truth and the “self” as the one who gets to ultimately determine the good for both the individual and society at large.

Abortion—along with the birth control pill—in many ways holds the modern project together since it represents a fundamental separation of our actions from their corresponding responsibilities and duties to others. Historian Carl Trueman makes this point in his recent book The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self by stating that in this cultural shift, sex became unmoored from the responsibilities and the “ideal of monogamous heterosexual marriage” which “has only recently become much easier to transact (with the advent of cheap and efficient contraception)” (38). In short, abortion and the pill allowed for more promiscuous sexual behavior without the fear of an unplanned pregnancy or the duties of a family. Modernity promised that one could have moral freedom void of the natural consequences and the corresponding responsibilities of our actions. This opened a whole new world of sexual freedom and moral autonomy that can be seen clearly in Griswold — which stated that the Constitution guaranteed the right of married couples to buy and use contraception without government restriction— and Roe all the way through the historic Obergefell v. Hodges decision which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.

While it is important to recognize that not all who support abortion rights or contraception today buy into every tenet of sexual libertinism, we must remember that our culture of abortion is built upon the ideal of the individual. It is a rejection of the dignity of the most vulnerable among us and directly confronts God’s design not only for sexuality and marriage but also for the moral order. Many of the visceral and raw emotional reactions to the Dobbs ruling show just how sacred abortion has become to the modern moral order. Indeed, it is the banner of the modern reign of the individual. 

The revolt

In remarks after the Dobbs ruling, President Joe Biden said, “Roe recognized the fundamental right to privacy that has served as a basis for so many more rights that we’ve come to take for granted, that are ingrained in the fabric of this country” which includes “the right to make the best decisions for your health. The right to use birth control. A married couple in the privacy of their bedroom, for God’s sake. The right to marry the person you love.” In the coming days and weeks, we will see a litany of bills in Congress—namely in the Democratic-controlled House—and increased political fervor around these issues with midterm elections around the corner as many seek to retain the Roe-like individual freedoms in a post-Roe world. 

Abortion was never simply about abortion; it represents an entire way of viewing the social order through the lens of individualism and moral autonomy.

To the surprise of many, 47 Republicans voted alongside all Democrats in the House to codify marriage equality, which would repeal the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act that recognized the historic definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. The bill would also require all states to recognize same-sex marriages, as long as it was valid in the state in which it occurred. The “Respect for Marriage Act” is headed to the Senate, where Democrats will need 60 votes to overcome the filibuster and call for a vote. Another bill being considered in the House concerns the right to contraception, which includes possible abortifacients being mislabeled as birth control and “emergency contraception”, an alarming section that carves out conscience protections enshrined in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act––a law that protects our bedrock principle of religious liberty––as well as troubling language that could give the government authority to supersede the beliefs of religious employers. And in recent weeks, we have also seen the House approve bills designed to guarantee access to elective abortion for all. 

As Christians seek to navigate a culture reeling from the pains of rejecting the created order as well as the details of each of these bills, we must do so with eyes open to the reality of what is being revealed. Abortion was never simply about abortion; it represents an entire way of viewing the social order through the lens of individualism and moral autonomy. It is at the very heart of the modern project of crafting our own meanings and realities—“my truth”—based on our own feelings and desires rather than recognizing that meaning and truth is rooted in a transcendent order given by our Creator. While these particular bills may be primarily about politics in light of the upcoming election and a direct reaction to the words in Justice Thomas’ concurring opinion in Dobbs, Christians should take these votes seriously as major cultural shifts are happening throughout our culture. 

The coming days, weeks, and months will likely not be easy nor will the next steps always be clear. But one thing is clear for Christians, true freedom and happiness is never found in ourselves nor is it found in the pursuit of self-determination. It is found in a relationship with God as our Creator and by recognizing his good design for marriage and sexuality. Human beings simply were not created to bear the burden of crafting our own realities but were made by God to derive our meaning and identities from outside ourselves.

True freedom is found in the One who is not reeling in fear or surprised by our arrogance and pride. Our God is reigning over all people, nations, and even our governing institutions. Christians, from the place of hope and peace, must seek to love our God and love our neighbor as ourselves (Mark 12:30-31), recognizing that the sins of this age may seem novel at first but at their core are the same issues we have always dealt with in social ethics. Let us be found proclaiming the truth about our shared human nature and our created realities, while at the same time opening our arms to those who have been cast aside and left in the wake of a failed pursuit of individualism and the empty promises of moral autonomy from the sexual revolution.

A round-up of post-Roe abortion developments in America
By / Jul 8

On the morning of June 24, 2022, the abortion landscape in the Unted States changed drastically with the release of the final opinion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health case. This decision overturned the horrific precedents in both Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey and ultimately sent the issue of abortion back to each state to decide. Since that moment, states, federal legislators, abortion providers, pregnancy resource centers, protestors, and others immediately began to feel the effects. This, in turn, has created an overwhelming flurry of activity on a number of fronts in the abortion debate over the past week. 

It is easy to believe that the overturning of Roe means that the fight to end abortion is over, but the reality is that much remains to be done and decided on the issue. The ending of Roe is a massive step worth celebrating, but it also marks the beginning of a new chapter in the pro-life movement. In order for Christians to wisely engage this issue, it is important for us to be aware of how the advocacy efforts around abortion are quickly changing. Below is a round-up of some of the most important developments that have come about since the Dobbs decision. 

In the states

Before the Dobbs decision, states were limited in their ability to regulate abortion, but a key outcome of the opinion was a returning of this issue to the people and their democratic representatives in the states. This means that a diverse array of state laws now govern the issue of abortion, all of which provide exceptions for when a woman’s life is at risk and do not criminalize women seeking abortions

Immediately following the decision and over the next few days, a number of “trigger laws” that totally ban abortion, with slightly differing exceptions for cases of rape and incest, went into effect in Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Missouri, Utah, Mississippi, Idaho, Tennessee, Texas, North Dakota, and Wyoming. In Alabama, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Arizona, abortion is currently banned due to pre-Roe bans that have remained on the books. It is likely that in some of these states, officials will ask the courts to rule on whether these laws can be reimplemented. Already, courts have temporarily blocked some of these bans in Utah, Arizona, Kentucky, and Louisiana. 

In Ohio, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, restrictions but not complete bans are currently in place, and several lawsuits have been filed to try and keep these bans from being enacted. Several other states, such as Tennessee and Mississippi, have gestational limit laws in effect until their total bans are ultimately enacted.

While we celebrate these states working to protect life, we must also acknowledge that this decision allows other states to regulate abortion as they see fit and even make their states “abortion destinations.” In Alaska, Colorado, Illinois, Maine, Nevada, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire, the right to abortion is protected under state constitution or law up until various gestational points. Even further, California, Connecticut, Washington, D.C., Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington not only protect access to abortion but are also expanding their laws to shield abortion providers from other state’s bans, create a “sanctuary” for those seeking abortions, and increase mandated insurance coverage for abortion.

One final group of states—Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Virginia—remain largely undecided on what their abortion stance will be. Currently, all of these states are allowing abortions up until various gestational limits, but either the courts, state legislatures, or voters may change those restrictions in the coming days.

In Congress

Though Democrats have had much to say on the end of Roe, the realities of a narrow majority in the House of Representatives and an evenly divided Senate prevent them from taking any real action to preserve access to abortion in states where it is now restricted or prohibited. It is important to note that while the Dobbs decision does return the issue to the states currently, it does not prohibit future federal legislation banning, restricting, or codifying abortion. Some Democrats, including President Biden, have urged Senate Democrats to carve out an exception to the legislative filibuster, a Senate rule that requires 60 votes to end debate and proceed to a vote on most partisan legislation, and codify Roe with a simple majority, rather than the 60 votes currently required. However, Sens. Manchin (D-WV) and Sinema (D-AZ) remain strongly opposed to this path.

Speaker Pelosi has committed to exploring legislation around data privacy concerns connected to apps such as period trackers and sensitive location data. She also has considered once again bringing the Women’s Health Protection Act to the floor for a vote. This bill is the most pro-abortion bill to pass the House, and it has failed in the Senate two times this Congress. There is no reason to believe that it would be successful with an additional attempt.

Additionally, Sens. Warren and Markey of Massachusetts introduced a bill targeting pregnancy resource centers for “disinformation”  and deception about services provided and preventing women from seeking abortions. This bill is unlikely to become law but has gained support from 15 Senate Democrats. For now, congressional Democrats are largely confined to using this issue to attempt to mobilize voters in November in hopes of winning large enough majorities to pass these pieces of legislation.

If Republicans win a majority in the House of Representatives in November, as many predict, some members of Congress have suggested taking up federal abortion restrictions such as the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act or the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. Though those bills might pass the House, they would face an uncertain future in the Senate, and would almost assuredly be vetoed by President Biden.

In the White House and administration

Following the ruling, the president has acknowledged there is little that he is able to do, and similarly to Congressional Democrats, urged voters to elect a filibuster-proof majority in November to codify Roe. The president also joined calls to create an exception to the filibuster in order to protect abortion rights.

Within the limited authority of the presidency, Biden committed to two primary steps: ensuring that women can travel to another state to receive an abortion and protecting access to FDA-approved abortion pills. Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre rejected calls to use federal lands, national parks, and Veterans Affairs hospitals to provide abortion services due to the “dangerous ramifications.” The administration also launched a new website clearly laying out a woman’s “reproductive rights” and providing features such as an abortion finder and information on insurance coverage of abortion. 

The attorney general and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have made similar commitments as Biden and are exploring avenues to ensure that states cannot ban medication abortion and to increase access to these abortifacents. The HHS also released new guidance on HIPPA enforcement “making it clear that providers are not required to disclose private medical information to third parties.” This guidance comes in light of some concern expressed by some women that period tracker or health information apps could threaten privacy rights and put them at risk if they seek to travel for an abortion.

Abortion clinics and pregnancy resource centers

Immediately following the decision, reports began to emerge of abortion clinics across various states either closing entirely or stopping their abortion services. Many abortion providers are considering how they can increase capacity in states where abortion is allowed in order to meet the demand of both local women and those traveling from out of state to receive an abortion. 

Pregnancy resource centers around the country are continuingto serve more vulnerable women who may choose to use their services now that abortion providers are no longer open. At the same time, many of these clinics have faced threats and violence in the wake of the decision. 

What comes next?

All of these efforts will continue to unfold simultaneously, creating new challenges and opportunities for the pro-life movement to evolve in this new season. One such challenge that the pro-life community will have to consider is the rise of the abortion pill and efforts to expand access to it in states where abortion is now illegal, as referenced by many pro-abortion officials. The abortion pill already accounted for over half of abortions in 2019 and is approved by the FDA for use for up to 10 weeks in a woman’s pregnancy. Recent changes now allow these abortifacients to be received through the mail from other states—even other countries—and can be done without an in-person doctor’s visit in many states. This represents a massive challenge toeliminating abortions and poses new legal territory for pro-life states to navigate. The ERLC has strongly opposed the proliferation of abortion pillsand will continue to advocate against their usage.

While we celebrate the reality of a post-Roe America, we must redouble our efforts to eventually reach a post-abortion America. As the landscape around abortion across the United States continues to change rapidly, the ERLC remains committed to ending abortion, saving lives, serving mothers, and supporting families while equipping churches to continue standing in the gap and praying for vulnerable mothers and their children.

ERLC interns Daniel Hostetter, Cooper Shull, and Rebecca Fried contributed to this article.

The U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade
By / Jul 1

In this episode, Brent and Lindsay discuss the historic ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Dobbs, overturning the abortion precedents set in Roe and Casey. They celebrate the decision and discuss the call of the church in a post-Roe world. They also talk about the victory for religious liberty at the Supreme Court in the Coach Kennedy case. 

ERLC Content

Culture

Connect with us on Twitter

Sponsors

  • Dobbs Resource Page | The release of the Dobbs decision marks a true turning point in the pro-life movement, a moment that Christians, advocates and many others have worked toward tirelessly for 50 years. Let us rejoice that we live in a nation where past injustices can still be corrected, as we also roll our sleeves up to save preborn lives, serve vulnerable mothers, and support families in our communities. To get more resources on this case, visit ERLC.com/Dobbs.
  • Sexual Ethics Resource Page | Do you ever feel overwhelmed by the constant stream of entertainment and messages that challenge the Bible’s teachings on sexual ethics? It often feels like we’re walking through uncharted terrority. But no matter what we face in our ever-shifting culture, God’s design for human sexuality has never changed. The ERLC’s new sexual ethics resource page is full of helpful articles, videos, and explainers that will equip you to navigate these important issues with truth and grace. Get these free resources at ERLC.com/sexualethics.