How Important Is Your Body to You?

Part II of a Series

I want to ask you a question: How important is your body…to you?

How important is it to you that you’re healthy?  If you go to the doctor because you are in pain, and she does some tests, and you’re not sure what the diagnosis will be, well… Maybe there’s nothing wrong with you, but maybe something is really wrong.  Do you worry?  Having a healthy body is pretty important to you, isn’t it?  You don’t even have to think about it to answer.

Do you care about your body?  Even in the best circumstances, when everyone and everything in one’s presence is trusted and safe, each of us has a basic concern about what happens to his or her body.  But when our bodies are in the presence of something which feels unsafe or someone we don’t trust, we are especially aware of our bodies and our concern for them.

What about laws and the government?  How important is it to you that the government and laws “stay away” from your body?  Do you want the government to refrain from putting unnecessary limitations or restrictions on your body?  Do you want to be protected from the government putting you in prison without justification or restricting your basic rights?  We all care deeply about our ability to move around, to assemble with others, and to speak freely.

Still, I think most people believe in a few reasonable restrictions on peoples’ bodies.  As one person in Oklahoma said to me, “My rights end where your rights begin.  There’s a civil rights bubble around each of us.”  I think a lot of people believe that, but even still, most of us don’t want the government putting a lot of unjustified restrictions on our bodies.  We definitely don’t want the government forcing us to do things with our bodies that we don’t want to do.

In light of this, consider these defenses of legal abortion: “It’s her body,” “She can do what she wants with her body,” “The unborn is a part of her body,” “The unborn is in her body,” and “The unborn is dependent on her body.”  What word pair is common to all of these?  Her body.  And the most common abortion defense of all only makes this emphasis more personal: “My body, my choice.”   

What’s the common word in all of these statements?  Body.  Her body.  My body.

In future posts in this series, I’m going to outline JFA’s approach to these bodily rights statements, including seeking to clarify what the person means by her argument and sharing analogies that help point out the truth about the limits to a woman’s bodily rights.  But this intellectual approach is only part of the puzzle, and as important as philosophy surely is, I am now realizing that as we make our arguments we must continue to express great sympathy and understanding for the woman’s concern for her body. 

I suggest that regularly in the midst of the discussion, we pause to reflect: Remember how important your body is to you. 

Then, remember that this dear person to whom we are speaking, if she’s a woman, has one of those bodies we’re discussing.  She can’t disassociate herself from her concern about her own body, at least not without purposeful effort.  But all of us can understand that right?  Even a man can understand the feeling of caring about one’s own body.

See www.jfaweb.org/blog/bodily-rights to read more posts in this series.

Focusing Only on the Woman for a Time Is Not Compromise

Part III of a Series

I’ve now written two posts in this series focused on the woman’s right to her body and the value she has as a person.  I’ve made the point that discussing what her right to her body entails must be accompanied by a sort of healthy recognition that we’re talking about somebody’s body.

You may worry that making this recognition somehow chips away at or cheapens our concern for the unborn child.  No, I’m not forgetting the unborn child.  Don’t worry.  But I am attempting to take seriously what it means to have a body and to have another person’s body inside one’s body.

Focus on the woman or focus on the unborn child?  It doesn’t have to be one or the other.  But I am arguing that in order to show concern for the woman’s real right to her body, in order to communicate to the pro-choice advocate the real value we believe the woman has, we might have to be okay with not mentioning the unborn for a moment.  This is a small concession, and I don’t think it’s a compromise.  Currently, the typical pro-choice advocate sees most pro-life advocacy as only about the baby.  There is truth in their perceptions, even though I think this characterization of us as mostly anti-woman is wildly off the mark. 

I’ve been working for years to respond to arguments about the woman’s body, and I have rarely, if ever, paused to reflect on the person I’m in fact discussing.  Without much fanfare, I’ve been discussing the physical organism, the body, to which she is more deeply connected than she is connected even to the unborn child inside of her.  For, of course, she isn’t connected to her own body through a placenta or umbilical cord or by “sharing space.”  She is directly connected to her body as her own.

With that reality in mind, I can no longer simply proceed as if this discussion of what her real bodily rights entail is a purely theoretical argument.  I can no longer proceed as if we simply need to get to the right answer about that argument, as important as that is.  Questions such as, “What rights and responsibilities does she have?” and “What limits can be legitimately made by law upon the actions of her body?” and “What is right?” are all important, to be sure.  Concern for the woman’s body doesn’t erase these other concerns.  We can’t love the woman and be sympathetic about her experience and simply ignore the question at hand, “Can you ask a doctor to kill the unborn child in her body?”  We must find a way to love both as equal human beings. 

I’m not arguing here for focusing on the woman to the exclusion of the unborn child.  I’m saying that I can no longer in good conscience simply think about, teach about, and respond to the statements and arguments regarding a “woman’s right to her body,” without giving some reflection and time to the fact that she has a special connection to her body, and all of our discussion affects her in a way it doesn’t affect us who don’t have her body.  I’m arguing that giving focus to the woman will gain us a hearing for our thoughts not only about her, but also about the unborn child.  Both the woman and the child are often forgotten in these conversations. 

Remember how important your body is to you.  This is not only about the woman, of course, but it is at least about the woman.  It would be a great progress for the woman to whom we are speaking to feel clearly the value we believe she has.  If we hope to kindle affection for unborn children as valuable human beings, one necessary (though not sufficient) step is to kindle affection for the woman experiencing unintended pregnancy. 

See www.jfaweb.org/blog/bodily-rights to read more posts in this series.

Practical Suggestions for Concern and Common Ground Regarding Bodily Rights

Part IV of a Series

I’ve made the point in the previous posts in this series, that when someone defends abortion by saying, “It’s her body,” the first thing we should do is find common ground and show concern for the woman and the uncontroversial aspects of her real right to her body.  Here are a few additional practical suggestions for finding common ground and showing concern for the woman when her bodily rights are the topic of conversation:

• “How does it feel for you to discuss this topic? I’m not sure I can understand what it’s like to discuss this, but I’d like to try.”

• “Is it difficult to be open-minded, considering what’s at stake for you? Can you describe for me what you feel is at stake with your legal right to abortion? How does this discussion affect you?”

• “This is a really difficult experience we’re talking about, and one that the woman understands in a way I cannot as a man. She has a body that has the ability to have another body inside of her. And then she sees all of these people arguing about what she can do or not do. She feels conflicted, perhaps, about what is inside of her when she is pregnant. She may feel conflicted about the circumstances in which she got pregnant and the man who contributed to her becoming pregnant. But now here she is, pregnant...and in a very real sense, she feels alone with her body and what’s happening within her body.”

• “There are many different ways in which women are oppressed and their bodies are not respected. The last thing I want, as a proponent of human rights, is for her real right to self-determination to be unnecessarily or unjustly restricted. I think we need more advocacy and action against rape and domestic violence and other forms of assault against women. These ways of treating women must be stopped. I am committed to giving my time and money to being a part of the solution.”

Here’s another thought you should consider: When someone says, “I have a right to my body,” there’s a possibility that the person is not really intending to make an argument.  The person may be intending to say something more emotive, something more like a desperate cry of self-preservation. 

I think the same is true, by the way, with many statements that seem to us to be justifications of abortion, but which pro-choice advocates are intending more along the lines of shows of sympathetic concern.  Sometimes when people mention poverty or single parents or other situations in which it’s understandable that a woman wouldn’t want to be pregnant, I think the person is really just processing and emoting with language, and is not really intending to give reasons in the sense of argument and logic. 

So it may be with the statement, “It’s her body.”  We can’t assume an argument is intended by those words.  Sure, an argument is definitely lurking in the shadows, even if its not intended, and we need to be ready for it.  I think the communication that’s intended, though, is something simpler: “Her body is affected by pregnancy a lot, and I care about her.”  We can surely agree with those sentiments.  Let’s pause, then, to hear the heart, and only move forward to clarify and respond to the intellectual arguments once that concern has been laid as a foundation stone in the conversation.

See www.jfaweb.org/blog/bodily-rights to read more posts in this series.

Is “It’s Her Body” a Statement about Biology? Ask a Question to Find Out.

Part V of a Series

Look at some of the most common defenses for legal abortion:  

• “It’s her body.”

• “The unborn is a part of the woman’s body.”

• “The unborn is in her body.”

• “She should be able to do what she wants with her body.”

• “My body, my choice.”

• “The unborn is totally dependent on her body.”

• “She has a right to her body.”

In this series, I’ve been issuing a wake-up call to help us remember our common sense when we hear these statements.  There is a person behind the statements, a somebody who has a body, and we must give some time and reflection to how this topic personally affects the women whose rights we’re discussing.  I’ve pointed out that we need only think about how important our own bodies are to us, and I’ve given some practical suggestions for ways to communicate our concern for women in discussions about abortion. 

I’ve also pointed out, though, that the same concern for human beings that motivates us to care for the woman also motivates us to speak up for unborn children.  Justifications for abortion based around claims about the woman’s body and her bodily rights don’t only present the relational challenge of “Do you care about a woman’s bodily rights?”  These justifications also present an intellectual challenge comprised of questions such as “What do the woman’s bodily rights entail?” and “Does her right to her body include the right to kill another human by abortion?”

So, keeping in mind that we not only need to show concern for women at the beginning of a discussion about a woman’s right to her body, but also throughout that discussion, let’s think together about the intellectual challenge: “Does a woman’s right to her body entail the right to abortion?”

When we hear the statements above, we are immediately confronted with a problem.  What are they?  Are they philosophical arguments, statements of feeling, vague sentiments, or some combination of these?  In my experience, I have found that many people don’t really know how they intend these statements.  But when we launch into a response as if they meant these as a full-fledged argument, many are surprised.  Sure, they may be surprised that their favorite slogan didn’t “silence all opposition” as it might have the last time they used it.  I think, though, that some of the surprise is due to the fact that the person is not intending to be philosophical at all.  Still, these statements have the structure of arguments, so we should gently respond.

When I hear a defense for legal abortion that references the woman’s body, my first questions are aimed at determining which of the following arguments the person is intending:

1. Because the unborn is in the woman’s body, dependent on it, connected to it, or “part of it” in some sense, then the unborn is not a human being.  (“The unborn is not a human organism biologically.”)

2. Because the unborn is in the woman’s body, dependent on it, connected to it, or “part of it” in some sense, the unborn does not have equal value or an equal right to life.  It is deficient and therefore it is not a person with equal rights and value. (“The unborn doesn’t have equal intrinsic value or rights.”)

3. Because the unborn is in the woman’s body, dependent on it, connected to it, or “part of it” in some sense, the woman should be allowed to kill the unborn through abortion because of her bodily rights, even though the unborn is a human being with equal value and rights. (“The unborn does have an equal right to life, but the woman’s bodily rights trump the unborn’s right to life.”)

So, to determine which of these arguments is intended, we ask a single question:

“When you mention the unborn’s connection to the woman’s body, do you mean that the unborn is not a human being with equal value, or do you mean that even though the unborn is a human being with equal value, the woman can still kill it through abortion because of bodily rights?”

 The point here is that we shouldn’t assume it’s a bodily rights argument straight off just because it refers to the “body,” nor should we assume it’s an argument against the biological status or value of the unborn straight off just because it seems to downplay the existence of the unborn’s own “body.”  We have to ask questions to know for sure.

Here’s an example of this problem.  You might have seen an image passed around on social media which pictures a pregnant woman with an arrow pointing to her saying, “Your body,” and an arrow pointing to the unborn child visible in her belly, saying, “Not your body.”  My friend Timothy Brahm at the Equal Rights Institute responded to this recently. 

I agree with the point of Tim’s post, and I encourage you to read it.  I’ll add a comment or two here.  Although there is truth in this meme (the unborn child does have her own body with her own bodily rights, after all), this image doesn’t really communicate any of the understanding and concern for the woman that I have been emphasizing in this series.  That’s perhaps the most serious problem with it.  The image also assumes that defenses for abortion referring to the woman’s body simply get the facts wrong about the number of bodies involved.  The image essentially takes all “it’s her body” statements to be claiming that, as a matter of biology, the unborn is simply a functional part of the mother’s body.  Tim calls this the “scientifically ignorant” position, and while he agrees that some people who make “it’s her body” (and similar) statements do hold the “scientifically ignorant” position, he points out that in many cases, the person is intending a bodily rights argument instead.  (As you can see from my questions above, I think there’s another possibility, too, that the person is making an argument against the value of the unborn.)

In my experience, many people who talk about the woman’s right to her body don’t have a clear idea of what they’re saying.  They are still working it out.  Once you ask the question I suggested above, you can help the person determine what he or she is trying to get at.  Some aren’t clear on biology.  They think that the unborn is less than an organism (a mere mass of tissue).  Some agree that the unborn is biologically a human organism, but they think it’s not the sort of human organism with rights because it’s dependent on another body.  This is a different argument.  And many are intending to make the claim that whatever the unborn might be, the woman’s right to her body takes precedence.

In any case, sharing the meme probably does more harm than good.  (Indeed, Tim’s stronger admonition to never share it is good advice.)  I’d prefer to share a different image that communicates better our concern for women and our understanding that in many cases, the person who says, “It’s her body,” is making a bodily rights argument, contending that the woman should be allowed to get an abortion even though there are two bodies involved.  This argument deserves our careful attention, and simplistic memes and dismissals which miss the point won’t help us dismantle it.

See www.jfaweb.org/blog/bodily-rights to read more posts in this series. 

From a Foundation of Love for Women and Children, We Respond Intellectually to Bodily Rights Arguments

Part VI of a Series

How should we respond to defenses of abortion that refer to the woman’s body?  Let’s review the steps I’ve outlined so far in this series and complete the process by preparing to respond intellectually:

1. Show concern for the woman.  I described how important this is in Part I of this series and elaborated on the concept in a series of follow-up blog posts.  I suggested that we remember our concern for our own bodies (Part II), realize that it’s not compromise to focus on the woman and not the unborn for a time (Part III), and find common ground about seeking to stop violations of a woman’s right to her body, such as rape, that we can all agree should be stopped (Part IV).

2. Ask a clarification question to determine if the statement referencing the woman’s body is arguing against the idea that the unborn is a human being with equal value (biologically not a human organism or lacking equal rights to the rest of us) or is intended to make a bodily rights argument (Part V).

3. If the person is fuzzy on biology, be ready to clarify the facts that show the unborn is a living, human organism (see www.jfaweb.org/extending-your-learning#biology).

4. If the person is fuzzy on the equal value and rights of the unborn, be ready to make an argument for those equal rights (see www.jfaweb.org/extending-your-learning#equal-rights). 

5. If the person is crystal clear that the unborn is a human being with equal rights but thinks abortion is justified anyway because of bodily rights, you know you’re discussing a bodily rights argument, but still you need to ask for more clarification.  When the person says, “The woman has a right to her body,” and intends a bodily rights argument, perhaps she means, “The woman can do anything she wants with anything in her body.”  Trent Horn has called this the “Sovereign Zone” view.

6. Be prepared to respond to the Sovereign Zone view.  This view makes a very strong claim.  Timothy Brahm’s “Autumn in the Sovereign Zone” essay (www.EqualRightsInstitute.com/SZ) will give you a good model for responding.  See also JFA’s Abortion: From Debate to Dialogue—The Interactive Guide, Activity 6 (www.jfaweb.org/extending-your-learning#bodily-rights) for a scripted dialogue that will help you learn to respond.

7. When the person says, “The woman has a right to her body,” she may mean, on the other hand, “the woman cannot be forced to use her body to sustain the life of the unborn.”  Trent Horn has called this the “Right to Refuse” view.  This view makes a weaker claim, and it can come in very sophisticated forms.  Use our post, “A Response to the Strongest Violinist” (www.jfaweb.org/DFG) to understand the “Right to Refuse” argument and learn to respond.  This post includes a link to a paper JFA helped produce which attempted to put this argument in its strongest form and respectfully show where the argument fails.

8. In all of the above steps, remember the woman.  When you are discussing the woman’s right to her body and whether it entails the right to legal abortion, there is a person whose body and life you are discussing.  In the same way, when you discuss the woman’s right to her body, you also must work to remember the unborn child, contrary to the spirit of the age.  Both the woman and the child are persons for whom these arguments are not mere intellectual exercises, but rather are matters intensely practical and intimate.

See www.jfaweb.org/blog/bodily-rights to read all of the posts in this series.

Note: A few minor edits were made to this post on 8/20/2018.

A Few Additional Thoughts on Bodily Rights and Abortion

Part VII of a Series

To wrap up this series for now, here are a few additional thoughts about bodily rights defenses of abortion:

Bodily Rights Arguments Commonly Come in Combo:

When someone says some version of “it’s her body,” many times it’s not as simple as identifying her argument as being in one of three distinct categories.  It’s not as simple as, “She’s either arguing that the unborn is not a human organism biologically, or arguing that the unborn is not equal in rights and value, or agreeing that the unborn is a fully valuable human being but that abortion should be allowed because of the woman’s bodily rights.”  Many times, the person holds more than one of these positions simultaneously.  In other words, many times bodily rights arguments come in combination with other arguments.

For example, a person may refer to the fact that the unborn is “in her body” and may be fuzzy on the biology, fuzzy on equal rights for the unborn, and may also be intending to make a sort of bodily rights argument.

I suggest peeling the arguments apart and seeing if you can get agreement on the biology first, then see if you can gain agreement about the equal rights of the unborn, then tackle the bodily rights argument once these foundation stones are laid in the conversation.

For Those Who Don’t Believe the Woman’s Body Is Her Body:

Someone may respond to my series by saying that “we are not our own” so “we don’t own our bodies.”  I assume that someone with this view would be consistent and say that even he himself doesn’t own his body.  This person might say, “in some philosophical or metaphysical sense, no one owns his or her body.”  Even if you believe this, this particular point won’t be very helpful when someone makes a bodily rights argument in a discussion of unintended pregnancy and abortion.  The question is this: Can you agree that among all human beings (and all collectives, such as governments), the person who is closest to having ownership of the woman’s body is the woman herself?  Even if you’re right in your philosophical point, shouldn’t we treat her as if she owns her body?

More Resources on Bodily Rights

Find a number of resources on bodily rights available at the link above, including...

• JFA’s Interactive Guide, Activity 6. If you read nothing else, this entry-level material will at least help you ask the right questions to determine if you’re encountering a bodily rights argument.

• “A Response to the Strongest Violinist” - JFA “De Facto Guardian” paper and other links.

• Trent Horn's debate with David Boonin on bodily rights (Both are experts on the topic.)

• Bodily Rights Resources from Equal Rights Institute (ERI)

• ERI President Josh Brahm teaches on bodily rights (video/audio).

Pray for Conversations - July

Pray for Recent and Upcoming Events (Partial List): 

Pray for wisdom for the team members who plan JFA’s event schedule.  Pray for the health of our trainers that they might keep active in the field.  Pray for each person we train and each person with whom we converse at outreach, that God will kindle new affection in their hearts for women in distress and for the smallest humans on earth. 

• July 18 (David City, NE): Interactive Workshop — Aquinas High School
• July 19, 21 (Columbus, NE): Interactive Workshops — St. Bonaventure Catholic Church
• July 28 (Washington, DC): Interactive Seminar — SFLA Regional Coordinators
• August 18 (Wichita, KS): Interactive Seminar — St. Mary’s Cathedral
• August 27-28 (Wichita, KS): Outreach Events — Wichita State University (WSU)
• August 27-29: Georgia Events — See link below for details.
• September: VA, KS, CO, and OK Events — Details TBA
• October/November: OK, KS, and TX Events — Details TBA

Featured Resource for Equipping Yourself - July

Read Steve Wagner’s recent article, “It’s Her Body,” and the accompanying series of blog posts to prepare for defenses of abortion that refer to the woman’s body, such as “my body, my choice” and “she can do what she wants with her body” and “the unborn is part of her body.”  Even after 15 years of engaging bodily rights arguments, Steve recently realized he’s been missing something very obvious and very important.  Through Steve’s reflection on a recent campus conversation, you’ll gain a new way of seeing these arguments and a step-by-step framework (including links to in-depth resources) for meeting the relational and intellectual challenges present in every discussion of bodily rights and abortion. 

Featured Conversation Starter for July

Use the recent JFA blog post, “Her Experience Matters,” to start a conversation with common ground.  This post features a JFA exhibit panel that uses Paul Simon song lyrics to give expression to the feelings of many women facing unplanned pregnancy.  In every conversation about abortion, you can find common ground on the importance of women and their bodies, and this post will help you do this in a natural way.  It will also help you to develop empathy for women facing unplanned pregnancies, and it will help you gently pose thought-provoking questions about those difficult experiences.

Her Experience Matters

What Do You Think?

Many pregnant women feel completely alone when facing unintended pregnancy.  Some believe their decision about their pregnancy only affects them.  Yet, aren't there two senses in which it isn't quite true that she is completely alone?

There's at least one sense in which she is not alone, for there is another being, one of the smallest humans on earth, who is very close by and is affected by her decision.  But does the presence of that being bring the comfort of togetherness or the terror of a life changed forever? 

There's another sense in which she doesn't have to be alone, but this second sense of "not being alone" depends on you and me.  Will we offer our help, without judgment, so she doesn't have to face this difficult situation alone? 

Pray with JFA - June 2018

Pray for Recent/ Upcoming Events (Partial List):

View fullsize

JFA volunteer Ashley (left) talks with a student at JFA's June 2018 outreach at Wichita State University.

Pray for wisdom for the team members who plan JFA’s outreach event schedule.  Pray for the health of our trainers that they might keep active in the field.  Pray for each person we train and each person with whom we converse at outreach, that God will kindle new affection in their hearts for women in distress and for the smallest humans on earth. 

• June 6 (La Mirada, CA):  Presentation - Redeemer Church
• June 7 (Wichita, KS):  Interactive Workshop - St. Patrick’s Catholic Church
• June 21 (Wichita, KS):  Poll Table Outreach Event - Wichita State University (WSU)
• June 23 (Phoenix, AZ):  Interactive Workshop (via video conference) - Civis Audacia
• June 24 (Washington, DC):  Interactive Workshop - SFLA Wilberforce/Stevens Fellows
• July 18 (David City, NE):  Interactive Workshop - Aquinas High School
• July 19, 21 (Columbus, NE):  Interactive Workshops - St. Bonaventure Catholic Church
• July 28 (Washington, DC):  Interactive Seminar - SFLA Regional Coordinators

Featured Resource - “A Living Room Conversation - Part 3”

Prepare for Conversations (June):

In the last two months, we’ve encouraged you to read Parts 1 and 2 of “A Living Room Conversation,” by JFA trainer Grace Fontenot.  This month, you can finish the story by reading Part 3, in which Grace discusses the topic of feminism with “Heidi,” a young woman she met, not during an outreach event, but in an everyday-life setting.  Do you know someone, like Heidi, who wants to be pro-life, but is fearful of coming across as “anti-woman”?  Through this story, you’ll learn one of the most powerful arguments we’ve found for helping pro-choice advocates rethink their position.  It will prepare you to explain how the pro-life view is the most consistent position on abortion for those who care about women’s rights and human equality.

Conversation Starter - “Can She Embrace Both?”

Featured Conversation Starter (June):

Use the recent JFA blog post, “Can She Embrace Both?” to start a conversation with a friend on social media.  The post features a panel from JFA’s Art of Life Exhibit which suggests that “embracing child and career” is “better than abortion.”  The image on the panel, though, is a painting which appears to be only loosely related to the title...until one looks a little closer.  The post also features free speech board comments about the panel and asks the viewer to add his or her own comments to begin a conversation.  The post ends with the question, “How can we help an underprivileged woman to embrace both her unborn child and her career?”

Can She Embrace Both?

View fullsize

Panel from JFA’s Art of Life Exhibit (Image: Madame Vigée-Le Brun et Sa Fille, by Louise Élisabeth Vigée Le Brun, France, 1786; More information: Art of Life web page)

One of my favorite panels from our Art of Life Exhibit juxtaposes a classical painting of a woman holding her daughter with the words “Embracing child and career” and “better than abortion.”

At the University of Oklahoma in 2016, though, one free speech board (see image nearby) showed that this panel made no sense to some viewers.  They pointed out, confidently, that sitting for a portrait isn’t a career, and a woman in 1786 couldn’t possibly have had a career anyway.

View fullsize

Comments on a JFA Free Speech Board (2016): “In 1786 this woman did NOT have a child and a CAREER!” and, [sarcastically], “Sitting for portraits is a career?”

Had these students looked with just a bit more curiosity at the panel in question (image nearby), they would have found etched just next to the date of the painting in the bottom right-hand corner the only clues they needed in order to discover the point of the panel — the title of the painting and the name of the painter: Madame Vigée-Le Brun et Sa Fille [by] Louise Élisabeth Vigée Le Brun.

This translates to Mrs. Vigée-Le Brun and Her Daughter [by] Louise Élisabeth Vigée Le Brun. 

Yes, indeed, there is little sense in displaying this lesser-known painting from the 18th century to illustrate the idea that a woman can embrace her child and her career, unless, of course, the woman pictured in the painting is...the painter...and the painting is her self-portrait!  A quick look at the website found on the panel (www.debate2dialogue.org) reveals that Vigée Le Brun was Marie Antoinette’s chief portrait painter.  Yes, at least one woman had a “bona fide career” in 1786!

I don’t recall talking to the students who wrote these comments.  When I came across the photos of the free speech board later, the fact that these students missed the point of the sign made me angry, and for a moment, I wanted to mock them and point out how foolish they were.  But then I caught myself.  Isn’t sadness a more appropriate response?  These dear people are missing out on a beautiful moment of realization, after all. 

When people outright reject or miss the point of our outreach events, our good-faith attempts to dialogue with them, the beautiful wonder of life in the womb, the truth about human rights, or any other gift we offer, it makes me sad — sad, first, that they missed the gift, and second, that I, in my weaknesses, have sometimes made it harder for them to receive it.

So, let me reach out to you in that same spirit, seeking to understand your perspective and working together to find truth.  What do you think about the message of this panel?  Do you think that a woman who is experiencing unintended pregnancy can embrace both her child and her career?

It's certainly true that Vigée-Le Brun had prestige and an income that many of the underprivileged women seeking abortions do not have today.  Let's use this painting only as a starting point then (not as a perfectly parallel situation).  Let's assume that we're talking about the typical woman facing unintended pregnancy today, and let's assume she is in a very difficult situation with little money and little hope: Does she have to choose between two goods she cares about, her child and her career?  How can we help an underprivileged woman embrace both her unborn child and her career? 

What do you think?

(Note: Portions of this post were originally published in the letter, "Clueless in the Face of a Great Gift" in December 2016.)

Pray with JFA - May 2018

Pray for Recent/ Upcoming Events (Partial List): 

View fullsize

Four simultaneous conversations are shown taking place during JFA's outreach event at Colorado State University (CSU) in April 2018.

Pray for wisdom for the team members who plan JFA’s outreach event schedule.  Pray for the health of our trainers that they might keep active in the field.  Pray for each person we train and each person with whom we converse at outreach, that God will kindle new affection in their hearts for women in distress and for the smallest humans on earth. 

• April 16-17 (Fort Collins, CO):  Kiosk Outreach Event — Colorado State University
• April 20 (Boulder, CO):  Interactive Workshop — University of Colorado Boulder
• April 21 (Englewood, CO):  Interactive Seminar — All Souls Catholic Church
• April 23 (Lakewood, CO):  Interactive Workshop — Colorado Christian University
• April 23-24 (Denver, CO):  Kiosk Outreach Event — Metropolitan State University
• April 24 (Boulder, CO):  Kiosk Outreach Event — University of Colorado Boulder
• April 27 (Wichita, KS):  Classroom Presentations — Bishop Carroll Catholic High School
• May 19 (Tempe, AZ):  Interactive Workshop — Tempe Public Library
• June 1 (Wichita, KS):  Interactive Workshop — Private Residence
• June 6 (La Mirada, CA):  Presentation — Redeemer Church
• June 7 (Wichita, KS):  Interactive Workshop — Closed Event