This transcript was generated from the episode’s YouTube captions and lightly edited for readability: filler words and the mid-show announcements have been removed. It may still contain transcription errors.

Are you confused about what you should say as a pro-lifer? Stick with us, we’ll clarify that for you. On the Case for Life podcast: hi, I’m your host, Scott Klusendorf. I want to thank Life Training Institute for sponsoring this podcast. You can visit them at prolifetraining.com and be sure to visit us and like our sites on social media. Pass them on to other friends so that this content can get out to them as well. You know pro-lifers often wonder: well, what should I say?

We talked last time about what we shouldn’t say. What are the things we should be saying to make our message clear, on point and understandable to people? Well, the number one thing we need to say and we’ll start from the top and work down the number one thing we need to be saying is a basic pro-life argument: that it’s wrong to intentionally kill innocent human beings. Abortion does that. Therefore, it’s wrong. Why are we pro-life? Because it’s wrong to intentional kill.

Intentionally kill innocent human beings. That’s what abortion does. That’s why we oppose it. We don’t oppose abortion because we hate women. We don’t Oppo oppose abortion because we just want to pass laws restricting their freedom. We’re not trying to take away anybody’s legitimate rights. We oppose abortion because we believe it intentionally kills an innocent human being. And we have good reasons to believe that. And, by the way, it’s not just prol lifers who say this. Recently even Bill Mah said it, and he’s no friend of pro-lifers.

Bill Mah said: hey, it doesn’t follow at all that pro-lifers hate women. That’s not why they oppose abortion, he said. The reason why they oppose it is they believe it’s murder. And because they think it’s murder they oppose it. Now he went on to say: you know what? Kill The Unborn anyway, because there’s 8 million too many people on the planet already and there just isn’t room for anymore. So, I don’t agree with his conclusion, but at least he was honest about the premises.

Prol lifers oppose abortion because they believe it intentionally kills an innocent human being. Keep the main thing the main thing. Secondly, we want to make the point that our pro-life worldview can account for human equality, while other views of the human person cannot. The pro-life view is that each and every human being has an equal right to life. The pro-abortion worldview denies this. It says that there’s one class of human beings over here we can set aside as non-persons and we can intentionally kill them, and there’s another class of human beings over here that are human persons that we can’t kill.

Now, what the difference is between a person and a non-person is seldom articulated in a way that makes sense, but we, as pro-lifers, need to make the case that it’s only our view of the human being that can account for human equality. Here’s why the pro-life view says each of us has value and a right to life, not because of some function we perform and can immediately exercise, like selfawareness, having desires, seeing ourselves existing over time, whatever trait is picked out as being decisive. We don’t argue that way.

We argue, to the contrary, that each and every human being has equal dignity and value, based on our nature, not our function. For example, think about the beach bum and the university professor, to borrow an example from Christopher CER. Each of them has equal intrinsic dignity in virtue of the kind of thing they are: human beings made in the image of God, Christians would say. But here’s the thing: even if they have equal intrinsic dignity, it may be the case they do not have equal attributed dignity, and here’s the difference between the two.

While the beach bum and the university professor have an equal right to life and an equal right not to be intentionally butchered. It doesn’t follow that each of them has equally flourished according to their Natures. The truth is, the University Professor has applied his craft in a way that allows us to attribute to him a measure of success and recognition we don’t give to somebody who just lays on the beach all day. In other words, the university professor has done things to earn our praise and our admiration ADM admiration while the beach bom has not.

But make no mistake, even though one has failed to flourish according to his nature, that beach Bum still has equal fundamental dignity to the university professor. It’s their attributed dignity that differs, not their fundamental dignity, and we need to make sure we keep that clear when we talk to people. We also want to make the point that all issues eventually get politicized. A lot of Christian Pastors in particular say: I don’t want to deal with abortion because I don’t want to wait into politics.

Here’s the problem with that view. All issues become politicized. It’s inevitable. Racism became politicized in the 60s, slavery became politicized in the 1860s. All issues eventually take on a political place in our culture. That’s no reason to say we’re not going to engage these moral issues simply because they become politicized. That’s a lousy excuse to do something instead. What we ought to say is: which moral issues should we work politically to advance? And certainly a moral issue that says we’re going to protect innocent human beings deserves our attention, even if it is politicized in Washington DC.

Another thing we need to say is that Christians are not imposing their morality on people. We’re pro opposing our views in hopes that the public will agree with us and vote them into law. By the way, that’s exactly how a constitutional republic is supposed to function. Everybody gets a voice at the table. Everybody gets to bring their views to the Public Square and argue for them, like everybody else does. Now I know there’s people out there who say: well, what if an Islamic devote says, Hey, I want the right to kill Jews?

Should he have the right then to participate in the Public Square? And my answer is: he has the same right as everybody else to make his case. Good luck getting that through our American system, which I’m glad he won’t be able to, but he has the same right to make his case. Prif lifers have the same right as everybody else to bring their issues to the table and argue for them in the Public Square. We may win, we may lose, but we shouldn’t be disqualified from participating just because there’s some who want to frame our arguments as imposing morality.

No, we’re not imposing our views. We’re proposing our views in hopes that the public will adopt them. That’s exactly how a constitutional republic is supposed to function. By the way, nobody argues when leftists bring religion into this debate. When they argue for Al alleviating poverty, or they argue that we should have more tax dollars spent on promoting equality in the culture. That seems to be okay, but the minute prol lifers argue for their view, they get dismissed as religious idiots who simply want to impose their narrow-minded, intolerant views on everybody else.

No, we’re simply arguing for our case like everybody else does. Fair is fair here. Either Americans have a natural right to argue for their views in the Public Square, as our founders said they did, or they don’t. And the minute you decide you’re going to disqualify one group from having a place at the table in our larger worldview discussions, the minute you’re eroding the freedoms that all of us have come to respect and learn from and lean on for our flourishing As Americans.

The final thing pro-lifer should say is that abortion is a gospel issue. But let me explain how it is. It’s not a gospel issue, because only by preaching the gospel will we convert people to the pro-life view. That is demon ably false. We did not end slavery by preaching the gospel. We didn’t end racial segregation by preaching the gospel, and it’s very possible abortion would end without preaching the gospel. The reason why abortion is a gospel issue is twofold. Number one: it’s the only hope for post-abortion men and women who have sinned on the issue.

The only forgiveness and healing that can be found is in repentance from sin and trusting in a savior who can save us from the evil we’ve done. But the second reason why abortion is a gospel issue is it fits within the Great Commission responsibilities of the local church. Think about Matthew 28. Matthew 28, Jesus tells us that we are To Go Make Disciples. What does it mean for believers To Go Make Disciples? Well, we’re told in the text. Let’s not read our own mission purposes into that.

Let’s see what the text says. Here’s what the text says: teach them to obey all that I have commanded. What is one of those commands in scripture? We’re not to shed innocent blood. What is abortion? The shedding of innocent blood? Therefore, abortion relates to the mission of the church in that it helps the church fulfill its Great Commission mandate to Go Make disciples. So when we look at what pro-lifer should say, we’ve got to be very clear that we are arguing our view.

It’s wrong to intentionally kill an innocent human being. Abortion does that. Therefore, it’s wrong. We want to be very clear that our view can account for human equality. We can explain why differences don’t mean lesser value. Our dignity is grounded in our fundamental nature, not in the actions we are able to immediately exercise. Also, we want to argue that all of our issues eventually become politicized. But that’s no reason to avoid taking on a moral issue that we have a moral oblig ation to speak up on.

Saying well, that’s a politics issue isn’t going to relieve us of our moral responsibility to speak truth to a culture hellbent on butchering children. And fourthly, we want to make sure that we help people understand that pro-lifers are not imposing their views. We are proposing our views in hopes that our fellow citizens will vote them into law. That’s exactly how a constitutional republic is supposed to function. We’re not being out of step to be at the table and have a voice like everybody else gets.

We’re simply participating in our own government, the way all citizens get to. And finally, the fifth thing: we need to be clear that abortion is a gospel issue. We need to be clear that the only hope for healing is found in trusting Christ alone for salvation. But we want to make sure we don’t claim that preaching the gospel is the only way that pro-life will win. God may have his ways of doing this that don’t involve preaching the gospel. God’s given us two ways to restrain evil: the gospel Proclamation that converts hearts, and civil law that controls the heartless.

Both are important. The gospel is necessary also because it helps the church fulfill its Great Commission responsibilities as outlined in Matthew 28. Thanks for joining us today. Keep focused on what we ought to say and we’ll say more about that the next time we meet I’ll see you then.