David French is a Senior Counsel at the American Center for Law and Justice. A graduate of Harvard Law School, he is a former Senior Counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund. David has written multiple books and his articles have been published by the Washington Post and Washington Times, among others. He has also founded Evangelicals for Mitt.

I wanted to bring David on to respond to the most common concerns that pro-life people have about voting for Romney. And that he did...

Here are the questions I asked David in this interview:

1. What do you say to Evangelicals who say that abortion is just another "social justice issue."
2. Why should evangelical's vote for Mitt Romney?
3. What is your response to William Saleton's lengthy piece in Slate about Romney's abortion views?
4. Do you think that Romney has a chance of winning the election?
5. Some people argue that Christians should just "vote their conscience" meaning vote for whichever candidate most aligns with their personal beliefs. So they usually vote third party or they don't vote at all because they argue that the outcome is not their responsibility, but voting their conscience is. What do you say to them?
6. Nick from Carbondale, Illionois: "Why should Christians accept the two-party system and indeed the political spectrum itself as somehow written in stone and never being able to change?"
7. Tara from Marietta GA: "How are we supposed to vote based on principles if we are given only non-principled choices?"
8. Jen from Rochester, NY: "Why should pro-lifers vote for Romney when his health care policy forced everyone to buy abortion coverage?"
9. What do you say to Christians in California and New York who feel defeated before the election even happens, or to Christians in Texas where they may feel complacent? How do you tell them to avoid discouragement or apathy?
10. Jonathan Merritt wrote a book called "A Faith of Our Own - Following Jesus Beyond the Culture Wars" and he argues that you're creating a false dichotomy for Christians: either fight the culture wars or stay silent. Is that a false dichotomy or is that not even your argument?
11. Greg from Kansas City: "Why should Christians vote for a Mormon over a Protestant Christian?"
12. What do you think Christians should be doing with social media in regards to this election?
13. What can and can't pastors do in regards to speaking about politics from the pulpit?

Josh, Liz and Gabi discuss the wisdom of pro-life activists choosing to compare abortion to recent tragedies like the Aurora movie theater shooting, or posting pro-life status updates every anniversary of 9/11. The Life Report team considers the toughest questions from the other side of this issue, and they end the 3-part discussion never fully agreeing on the subject.

Note from Josh: Bryan Kemper from Stand True Ministries and now working for Priests for Life was one of the main instigators to this comparison that we're responding to. I consider Bryan a friend and colleague, and he is doing a lot of great and important work for the unborn. Good people can disagree on this issue, and we certainly don't pretend to be right about everything. But we DO believe this is a discussion worth having, so that whatever pro-life people decide to do in the future with their Facebook statuses, they will have at least thought about it some more first. Everything we do to end abortion should be done purposefully and thoughtfully. So let's discuss these difficult topics, but don't stop there: GO DO SOMETHING.

Josh, Liz and Gabi stayed after the two episode shoot and responded to arguments for and against Bryan Kemper's picture, from both pro-life and pro-choice people. Here are the arguments we covered:

• "We wouldn't hesitate to make [the Aurora] comparison if it were three year olds."
• “It’s the 4,000 a day that are being minimized; this is a good opportunity to make the stats meaningful to people.”
• “Babies are dying and we should do whatever it takes to end the apathy.”
• “No comparisons are needed if both events are inherently wrong.”
  • Josh tells a story about what he recently told pro-choice people that reject ALL analogies to slavery and the Holocaust.
• Nick on Facebook: “If [the picture] leads to the question, 'well what makes killing a born person different from killing the unborn,' than it helps advance the discussion for unborn rights. Comparing abortion to say infanticide may help make the comparison seem more apparent. Yes some people will be turned off, but people are always turned off by the pro-life message."
• Kelly on Facebook: "I believe these comparisons are basically good (usually) and, many times, necessary. Like any good teacher would do, in explaining a pro-life view to a non pro-lifer, one must use examples & images of familiar things in order to reach the student where he/she is. What better way than to use an example from the media that everyone (well, almost everyone) knows about? It almost doesn't matter if they initially respond negatively; they certainly won't forget it!"
• Andrew on facebook: “My question for prolifers is do you think it’s appropriate for the media to talk about the 'need for gun control' after this tragedy? I feel its a double standard."
• Jessica (pro-choice): "I will whole heartily admit abortion kills. But to that person, whom was carrying that fetus, they felt terminating that pregnancy was needed or else they wouldn't have done it, its not a choice taken lightly. I feel like comparing a random killing spree by a mad man to the termination of life within one’s womb is a stretch. And probably offensive to those involved. 'Oh, your son was shot in the head? That's totally like this aborted fetus over here.'"
• Greg: (personally pro-life) "On another page somebody compared the right to having an abortion to the right to removing or treating cancer. I cannot imagine a pro-choice person looking at this picture thinking, 'Oh, no! I never realized women who abort or the doctors who perform abortions could be equated to mass murderers. I'm switching sides! Thanks for the heads up.' The same way I can't see pro-life people reading the cancer comparison and saying 'Oh, I see now. I don't want to live with cancer. People should be able to have all of the abortions they want. Thanks for explaining it in that way.'"
• Angela: ‎(reacting to caption under Bryan’s pic) "Some may say it is wrong to compare these two issues. So what, we don't care about people's feelings. GO PRO LIFE!" < is all I read. Not to mention the fact that this picture-maker is taking advantage of such a RECENT tragedy. Let these people's families finish their burial services before you bastardize their memories for your agenda, please."
• Lindy: (pro-life) "I guess I don't like the word "murder" in pro-life graphics. I think 1) it turns people off extremely fast and 2) technically "murder" is the illegal taking of a life, which abortion isn’t."

Josh, Liz and Gabi discuss the wisdom of pro-life activists choosing to compare abortion to recent tragedies like the Aurora movie theater shooting, or posting pro-life status updates every anniversary of 9/11. The Life Report team considers the toughest questions from the other side of this issue, and they end the 3-part discussion never fully agreeing on the subject.

Note from Josh: Bryan Kemper from Stand True Ministries and now working for Priests for Life was one of the main instigators to this comparison that we're responding to. I consider Bryan a friend and colleague, and he is doing a lot of great and important work for the unborn. Good people can disagree on this issue, and we certainly don't pretend to be right about everything. But we DO believe this is a discussion worth having, so that whatever pro-life people decide to do in the future with their Facebook statuses, they will have at least thought about it some more first. Everything we do to end abortion should be done purposefully and thoughtfully. So let's discuss these difficult topics, but don't stop there: GO DO SOMETHING.

Josh, Liz and Gabi react to a leaked Planned Parenthood document that trains their volunteers to purposefully have bad dialogues with pro-life people. A stark contrast is made between the kind of dialogue that Planned Parenthood wants us to have, and the kind of dialogue we've been training people to have on this show. There are also some insights that can be made on the way Planned Parenthood directors think based on things that are said in this document.

Josh explains a relatively new app we're using on our facebook fan page to reward our most active fans. In the past we've been rewarding with free pro-life books. Future rewards to include pro-life clothing and exclusive Life Report audio.

Josh responds to a listener mail question about a pregnant Chinese immigrant Bei Bei Shuai who attempted suicide and in the process, her baby died. She is now being charged with feticide, and pro-choice advocates are talking about this story all over the country. Josh clears up a common misconception among pro-lifers about Roe vs. Wade and the Laci Peterson Law, and offers a thought experiment to defend why perhaps this woman should be charged with something.

Josh claimed that most 26-week premies survive. This is based on a premie survival rate based on stats from March of Dimes. According to MOD, 80-90% of 26-week premies ultimately survive. Bei Bei Shuai's baby at 33 weeks almost certainly would have lived.

Josh responds to a listener who believes she found a flaw in Trent Horn's definition of personhood. Luckily, she just misunderstood Trent's definition, and strongly oversimplified it. Josh explains why and recommends some good books on the substance view of persons.

Josh Brahm responds to a listener who disagrees with a recent Life Report episode on voting principles, featuring Scott Klusendorf and Jonathan Keller. The listener thinks we need to use long-term strategy when voting, like chess.

Josh, Liz and Life Report's newest co-host, Gabi Vehrs, discusses that "after-birth abortion" article, including how many pro-life people responded to it, as well as a refutation of the underlying premise in the article.