Rebecca Hashke from Justice For All joins Josh Brahm and Gabi Vehrs to discuss a question that pro-lifers often struggle with.

After offering some thoughts on how pro-lifers should respond to this question, the discussion turns to another philosophical conundrum that pro-choice people often ask about: should the fact that abortion bans would be hard to enforce mean that we shouldn't try to make abortion illegal?

Our favorite Notre Dame Law grad John Gerardi joins us again, this time to discuss the Pope's recent confusing comments about abortion.

Note from Josh: We recorded this episode in October, 2013. I'm grateful that yesterday (December 9th) Pope Francis made a clear pro-life statement to the Dignitatis Humanae Institute, a pro-life group in Rome.

Steve Wagner from Justice For All joins Josh Brahm and Gabi Vehrs to discuss what Students for Life clubs should do with their events.

Steve argues that every event should create a debate about abortion that can be turned into a dialogue.

Here's the list of typical pro-life campus club activities that Steve assesses in this episode:

1: Cupcakes For Life.

2: Poll table event - Debate2Dialogue.org for pics.

3: Bringing speakers (pro-life apologetics, post-abortion, etc.) or hosting a debate.

4: Screening movies like "It's a Girl," "180," "October Baby" and "Bella."

5: Volunteering for the local Pregnancy Resource Center.

6: Diaper drives.

7: Traveling to the March for Life.

8: Bound4Life events. (Red tape over mouth.)

Steve Wagner from Justice For All joins Josh Brahm and Gabi Vehrs for a two-episode discussion about common terms and labels used in the abortion debate. 

In this episode they focus on the labels that both sides of the debate call the entity killed in an abortion: unborn, preborn, zygote, embryo, fetus, fetal human, baby and child.

Steve uses the word "unborn" at the beginning of a dialogue with a pro-choice person so as not to add an unnecessary impediment to the conversation, and to avoid begging the question.

Steve responds to the following challenges to his approach:

"Aren't we humanizing the unborn by calling her a 'child' or by using male/female pronouns?"

"What about when we're writing? Do we always need to make a case for the humanity of the unborn before we start calling her a 'baby' or using male/female pronouns?"

Steve Wagner from Justice For All joins Josh Brahm and Gabi Vehrs for a two-episode discussion about common terms and labels used in the abortion debate. In this episode they focus on the labels that both sides of the debate call each other: pro-choice, pro-abortion. pro-abort. pro-abortion-choice. pro-life. anti-abortion. anti-choice.

Steve, Josh and Gabi explain why they are willing to use the term "pro-choice" when beginning a dialogue, even though many pro-life people see that as an inaccurate "weasel word." 

Steve argues that he needs to ask the person in front of him a lot of questions to accurately understand what they think about abortion, and he doesn't want to create unnecessary impediments to the dialogue by using offensive terms that he doesn't even think accurately portrays most abortion advocates.

Steve also responds to the following challenges to his approach:

"But isn't 'pro-choice' the least accurate label for the other side?"

"What about when it's just pro-life people hanging out? Should we call them 'pro-aborts' then?"

"What if the entire pro-life movement decides to use gracious language while the other side uses rhetorically powerful labels? Are we giving up too much ground? What if unborn babies die because of this approach?"

"What should I do when I see other pro-life people using terms on Facebook that I think are mean or inaccurate? Should I confront the pro-life person, or just let it go?"

Finally, Steve, Josh and Gabi discuss the terms that pro-choice people often call pro-lifers: anti-abortion and anti-choice.

In the next episode, they will discuss the terms used for the unborn. (Zygote, embryo, fetus, unborn, preborn, baby, child.)

Megan Almon from Life Training Institute joins Josh Brahm and Gabi Vehrs to discuss strawman fallacies.

Josh starts the show by stating that both pro-life and pro-choice people strawman the other side all the time, and he shares several examples.

They then discuss how people can avoid making strawman arguments. How can we intentionally listen to people and ask a LOT of clarification questions to determine what they actually believe?

Josh Brahm and Gabi Vehrs have a candid conversation about the state of the pro-life movement, and some of the most important things we need to do in the next ten years to set ourselves up in a good trajectory towards victory.

Josh, Gabi and Megan Almon from Life Training Institute discuss how pro-lifers can best respond to pro-choice people who argue that abortion should be legal because the world is overpopulated or because women will die in back-alleys if abortion became illegal.

Note: Our strategy for responding to back-alley abortions relies heavily on the work of Steve Wagner from Justice For All.

The second part of Josh's interview with Brad Mattes, CEO of Life Issues Institute and host of the Emmy award-winning television show, "Facing Life Head-On." Brad answers the questions from the "Life Report Questionnaire" and more!

Questions:

1. What did you get in trouble for as a child?
2. What is your favorite movie, and why?
3. What has been the pro-life movement's greatest victory (or victories) so far?
4. What has been the pro-life movement's greatest failing or weakness?
5.  Does the pro-life movement need more unity, and if so, how can we accomplish that?
6.  Graphic Pictures: Should we use them, and if so, how, when, and where?
7.  What would you say to those who would argue that graphic pictures should be used in very public places because children don't seem to be too negatively effected by them?
8.  Stem Cell Research & Human Cloning: What should pro-lifers be doing about this, and why?
9.  What would you say to those who say it's unfair to compare the current successes of ESCR with adult stem cell research since ASCR has had more public funding until recently?
10.  What should pro-lifers be doing about human cloning now that it might actually be a reality?
11.  Assisted Suicide & Euthanasia: What should pro-lifers be doing about this, and why?
12.  Is the Netherlands a lost cause on the end-of-life issues debate?
13.  Respond to Americans who look at the problems with euthanasia in the Netherlands and respond, "That's them. We will do it better."
14.  What do you say to someone who is for assisted suicide in certain hard cases?
15.  How should pro-lifers interact with those who are pro-abortion-choice?
16.  Respond to pro-lifers who would say that we should be shouting at pro-choice people because that shows we're taking baby killing seriously.
17.  What single thing should pro-lifers be doing that most are NOT doing right now?
18.  How can pro-lifers start conversations about such a dark issue without being weird?
19.  How should pro-life people use Facebook?
20.  If people went to LifeIssues.org what could they find there?

Josh interviews Brad Mattes, CEO of Life Issues Institute and host of the Emmy award-winning television show, "Facing Life Head-On."  Check back in two weeks for the second part of this interview, where Brad answers the questions from the "Life Report Questionnaire" and more!

Questions:

1:11 - How did you get involved in the pro-life movement?

2:15 - How early was Dr. Wilke publishing pro-life literature and media?

2:54 - How do you think the pro-life movement has changed in the last 40 years, especially as it relates to media?

5:04 - What have you learned about how abortion affects men?

6:45 - What resources are available at http://LifeIssues.org?

7:32 - Tell us about your TV show, "Facing Life Head-On."

9:01 - What are some of the common themes on your show?

9:37 - How do you get Emmy nominations doing pro-life work?

10:38 - What were you hoping to accomplish by going to Ethiopia?

11:57 - What happened with the Ethiopian abortion worker you spoke to?

13:20 - Can you tell our audience about the woman you met who is suffering from leprosy?

14:14 - How has your life changed since you came back?

16:09 - What was the most difficult interview you did on Facing Life Head-On?

18:33 - Do you have a few favorite episodes looking back?

19:26 - How can we overturn Roe vs. Wade?

20:38 - Looking ahead, what will be very important for the pro-life movement to do differently as we work towards overturning Roe vs. Wade?

21:52 - Is there anti-intellectualism in the pro-life movement, and if so, how do we combat that?

Check out the Life Issues Institute website and TV show:

http://lifeissues.org

Comment on this episode at:

http://ProLifePodcast.net/175

I got a wonderful email from Andres in Santa Barbara who was in a dialogue about abortion and used an analogy about being hooked up to a machine in order to demonstrate that your personhood isn't based on your dependance. But the person he was talking to retorted, "Are you comparing a woman to a machine?!" Andres wants to know what I would suggest we do to avoid throwing people off when the analogies we use seem, at a surface level, to demean pregnant women.

In the video, I offer six tips for making clear analogies and responding to people who continue to misinterpret them.

1: Make sure you're communicating clearly.

2: Narrate the debate.

3: Suggest a golden rule for dialogue.

4: Explain that analogies are just that...analogies!

5: Explain that pro-choice people would be wise to not throw out all analogies.

6: Determine the right time to politely end the conversation.

Find more resources about bodily rights argument for abortion at:

http://prolifepodcast.net/tag/bodily-rights

Casey Vroman from Students for Life of America joins us in studio to talk about the free resources that SFLA offers to college students and now high schoolers. We believe it's important that all pro-life advocates know about these resources so that you can point students in your sphere of influence to them.

Questions:

1:55 How did you get involved with Students for Life and the pro-life movement?

3:15 How would you explain what Students for Life does to somebody who hasn't heard of SFLA before?

4:22 What is SFLA's long-term goal with campus clubs?

5:35 What is SFLA doing with high school students now?

6:46 What has it been like working with high school students?

8:18 Is SFLA planning on working with junior high students in the future, and what would you say to concerned parents about that?

10:29 What are some of the initiatives you're doing on college campuses now?

13:23 What practical resources is SFLA offering to college students?

16:14 What are some common mistakes students can avoid when starting a campus club?

19:50 Should clubs embrace a "whole life" model where they're also talking about capital punishment, sex trafficking and adoption, or should they focus on talking about abortion?

23:35 Talk to us about the Wilberforce and Steven's Fellowships.

25:20 What would be your key piece of advice for a high school student who wants a career in the pro-life movement?

Related Links:

- Visit Students for Life's website: http://StudentsForLife.org.

- Read Scott Klusendorf's "reading list for smart pro-lifers" that Josh referenced: http://bit.ly/17RnCNS

- Visit Students for Life's career opportunities page Josh referenced: http://StudentsForLife.org/Internships

Here's an outline of my main points in response to this question from Bobby: "Some pro-life people oppose 'incrementalist' pro-life laws because they always end with '... and then you can kill the baby.' What are your thoughts?

Note: Many of my arguments and thinking on these issues comes from conversations I had with Scott Klusendorf and Dr. Francis Beckwith, who both graciously spent time with me while I was working through these issues in 2007. I'm not sure now who said what and how many of these arguments are really my own, nor would I want to source any of these arguments directly to Scott or Frank without their permission. (These were all private conversations.) It's probably a fair assumption that the really smart talking points came from one of them though.

This was supposed to be a video but we had technical difficulties with the recorded video, so I'm posting the audio only.

Common ground: I agree that we don't want to communicate to people that we only care about babies that feel pain, are a certain age, not conceived in rape, etc.

I disagree that most forms of incremental legislation send that message. I think most people know how politics works.

It's one thing to endorse something, it's another thing to say what is allowed under the law. I offer a clear example of this from Gonzales vs. Carhart.

My argument is not that we should do evil that good may come. My argument is that when we pass incremental bills that will have a positive impact for the unborn, we are not actually doing evil. We are doing a good thing.

What's implicit in these bills is that we want to save all, but we know we can't, so we're going to save the most we can, and go from there. That's called graduated absolutism.

Why I'm not utilitarian: I'm not saying 'We'll kill one baby if you let another go.' It's more like if in a Japanese POW camp, the Japanese soldier tells a prisoner, 'We'll let you go, and you can either take two with you and we'll kill the other eight, or you can go alone and we'll kill all ten.' It seems like some pro-life people that support personhood amendments would say that by taking the two I'm implicitly saying you can kill the other eight. 'As long as you give me these two, THEN you can kill the POW's.' No, we value life, and we're trying to save as much as we can.

The Bible doesn't say that if you can't save all, you can't save any. The midwives in Exodus 1 weren't able to save all the babies, but they saved as many as they could, and they are praised for it. When the Pharaoh confronted them, they didn't make a pro-life argument or statement; they lied about it so that they could continue saving some! It could be argued that they were implicitly telling the leader of the land that it's okay to kill infants. They never to his face say 'You shouldn't do that.' They lied, and saved as many as they could.

William Wilberforce helped pass a bill, the Foreign Slave Trade Bill of 1806) that you could have ended with, 'and then you can sell the slave.'

Do you think it's more important to make an impact or to make a statement? I don't believe that passing a bill with a rape exception tacked onto it at the last minute sends a message to pro-choice people that we don't care about the babies conceived in rape that are sometimes killed in abortions.

Are there some pro-life bills that don't directly save many lives after they pass? Yes. (Parental notification with judicial bypass; the partial-birth abortion ban.) Yet both had educational value, especially the PBA ban.

After summarizing Abby Johnson's story, Josh asks 40 Days for Life co-founder Shawn Carney about his ministry as well as the state of the pro-life movement.

Questions:

1. How do you think 40 Days for Life has changed the pro-life movement?
2. Knowing what you know now, what would you have done differently when starting 40 Days for Life?
3. Do people often go from participating in 40 Days for Life to doing other pro-life activities? What are you doing to encourage that?
4. What do you think are the best methods for a local 40 Days for Life campaign?
5. What could RLCC do better to persuade people to participate in sidewalk counseling?
6. What has been the pro-life movements greatest victory so far?
7. What has been the pro-life movements greatest weakness?
8. What single thing should pro-lifers be doing that most are not doing right now?
9. How should pro-life people interact with those that are pro-abortion-choice?

Josh, Tim and Gabi discuss what it actually means to be open-minded, (it does NOT mean being wishy-washy,) and whether pro-life people should be open-minded too.

After wrapping up four Life Report episodes, Josh, Tim and Gabi hung out to cover some material they didn't have time to get into earlier in the day. Those topics and questions for Tim include:

1. You said, "Love does not insist on its own way; it does not need to have the last word in a debate." Does that conflict with the Stand to Reason mantra of trying to leave people with a pebble in their shoe?
2. A discussion of pro-life memes and why most of them are bad.
3. You said, "Love is not resentful, it does not dwell on the failures of those around us. Love does not rejoice at wrongdoing. It is not excited when those around us are caught in sin." What about pro-life groups like Live Action that do undercover investigative videos catching Planned Parenthood doing bad things?
4. Can you talk about how we are to love practically with those in the pro-life movement who may disagree on our political method, for example on our use of graphic images? How would you apply your piece to that?
5. Which line in the 1 Cor 13 piece do you feel is the most important, or the most contrasted by the way a lot of pro-life people actually act?

Megan Almon from Life Training Institute joins Josh and Gabi to discuss how pro-lifers can have productive conversations about Gosnell, as well as the common mistakes pro-lifers should avoid.

One of the most common questions we get is "how do you start non-weird conversations about abortion when you're not on campus next to a pro-life exhibit?" One of the easier methods is to use a story that's currently in the news. Josh thinks pro-life people can have good conversations about abortion starting with the controversy of what Gosnell did, but he doesn't think you should stop there. He uses several specific questions to lead the conversation into talking about the abortions that are less controversial to pro-choice people: abortions done on first-trimester babies that are in the womb, aren't viable, aren't conscious and don't feel pain.

After giving these questions and dialogue tips, the discussion turns to what pro-life people should NOT do when talking about Gosnell. What are the most common mistakes pro-lifers make regarding this story? Listen to the episode to find out.

Josh also briefly responds to the pro-choice argument that it's pro-lifers fault that women went to Gosnell's clinic in the first place.

Note from Josh: We shot this episode a week before Gosnell was finally convicted of murder, among other things. This content is still relevant, it just means you might change the first question from "Should Dr. Gosnell be in jail," to something like "do you think it's a good thing that Dr. Gosnell is serving a life sentence in prison?"

Last February we published two episodes with our favorite (nearly graduated) student from Notre Dame Law John Gerardi with an update on the HHS mandate lawsuits as well as answering the controversial question, "why did so many church-going Catholics vote for President Obama, again?!"  After we recorded those two episodes, we spent another 20 minutes answering questions we hadn't talked about yet, and answered a good questions sent from a listener. This is the audio from that post-episode discussion.

Topics/Questions:

1. "Tell me about states like Massachusetts, that are heavily Catholic and Irish but are totally in the tank for Obama."
2. "What do you think is the future for the bishops' involvement in politics?"
3. Karen: "Is it even possible that we really change our society legislatively, or do we need to concentrate on the hearts of women and men?"

Note from Josh: We try to get bonus audio published a lot closer to the original recording, but it wasn't as high of a priority as keeping our publishing schedule for TV and radio. As you listen to this, it'll be obvious that this was recorded before Pope Benedict stepped down.

Also, John said in this discussion that we're only "one Supreme Court justice away from overturning Roe vs. Wade." Based on some recent research that I plan on blogging about in the future, I now think this may be a bit optimistic. In other words, I think it's more likely that we have one or two justices that would overturn Roe, and a few others that we really don't know how they would rule on overturning Roe, even if they have pro-life beliefs. I hope history proves me wrong.

Josh, Tim and Gabi respond to fair questions that pro-choice people ask that we think pro-life people should be willing to answer.

In this episode, we discuss how a lot of pro-choice people believe that pro-lifers want to punish women for having premarital sex by forcing them to remain pregnant. This seems clear because we're not distributing condoms or encouraging the use of birth control, which could arguably lower the rate of unintended pregnancies and abortions. How should pro-lifers respond to this concern?

We also discuss the common conception (no pun intended) that pro-life activists are doing what they do because they're Christians. If so, is this just a ploy to force religion on people or win converts?

We end the episode by discussing a recent story of a teen who sued her parents who were trying to coerce her into having an abortion. We offer some tips for pro-life people to use this story in dialogues with their pro-choice friends.

Josh, Tim and Gabi spend the next two episodes responding to fair questions that pro-choice people ask that we think pro-life people should be willing to answer.

For example, when pro-lifers "trot out a toddler," does that mean we think women that have abortions are just as evil as mothers who kill their toddler?

They also discuss how pro-choice people are often confused when they see a picture of a six-day old embryo at implantation, and then see us point at that picture and call it a "person."

It’s the twelfth and final part of our popular “Responding to Pro-Life Lies Video” series! The video we're responding to lists 55 “pro-life lies” a woman named Kenna heard, and in this series we respond to them all.

This is the first of four episodes with Josh's brother Timothy, who is now a staff member at Justice For All.

After discussing the last six "lies," Josh, Tim and Gabi have a conversation about the need for pro-life people to get out of their "echo chamber," and the need to ultimately be known by their love. We also communicate a mutual desire for both sides to be more charitable, considering the best arguments from the opposing side as opposed to just trumpeting the worst they can find.

Here are the 8 “pro-life lies” we respond to in this episode:

1. "Birth control causes abortion."
2. "Emergency contraception is an abortifacient."
3. "Women are sacred vessels."
4. "Pro-choice women don't have children."
5. "Pro-choice women should have their children taken away."
6. "Pro-choice people don't care about babies."

Note from Josh: I reached out to Kenna to let her know we finished the series based on her video and offered her a chance to respond. She wrote, "It was great to meet people who could discuss abortion and present their point of view in a civil manner. YouTube was my main forum for political discussions and it doesn't have the greatest reputation. I'm not as active online anymore since I finished college and started working, but I really did enjoy your podcast. Congratulations on finishing your series." ~ Kenna

I told her I would always be open to discussing abortion with her further.

Stephanie Grant, Executive Director of Infant of Prague Adoption Services and Laurel Boylan, Founder of God's Waiting Children join Josh to discuss adoption.

Topics include:

• Clarifying common misconceptions about adoption.
• The difference between open and closed adoption.
• The differences between the process of domestic and international adoption.
• Available grants for adopting parents.
• Addressing the common resentment between families that have adopted domestically and those that have adopted internationally.
• An update on the situation with Russian president Vladimir Putin banning American families from adopting children from Russia.
• How adopting children from the foster care system works.
• Does a pregnant teen need to choose adoption before contacting an adoption agency?

This is the recording of a sermon Josh preached on January 20, 2013 at Free Grace Church in Clovis.

Josh addresses two common reasons why Christians don't take a stand to make a difference on the issue of abortion: the concern of offending people, and the argument that pro-life advocates should be focused solely on Christian evangelism. Josh argues pragmatically that pro-life work has actually given him more opportunities for evangelism and than makes a principled argument that Christians should be doing both evangelism AND speaking up for the unborn.

Josh closes with some easy things that Christians can do to dip their toe in the waters of pro-life advocacy, and then takes a few questions that were texted in anonymously from the congregation.

Q&A Session:

1. "I have a friend that believe that abortion is actually evil, but he doesn't care. He blatantly admits that he is selfish and apathetic but he chooses not to do anything about that. How do you think I could help him to care and deal with his apathy?"
2. "Could you recommend one foundational pro-life and pro-choice text for a better understanding of both sides of the abortion issue?"
3. "I know a young girl who recently had an abortion. What can I do or say to help her that she had other choices?"
4. "What do you say to people who say that the embryo evolved because it has gills and a tail?"

Pro-choice people often accuse pro-life Christians of being hypocrites, charging that we don't really believe what we say we believe, evidenced by the fact that some Christians have abortions, among other things.  Hypocrisy is a rhetorically powerful charge, effectively silencing many Christians from saying anything about the issue of abortion.

It's our view that some pro-choice accusations of pro-life hypocrisy are unfair, but that some of their charges are fair. In this episode, we discuss both categories.

We’re super excited about this episode, because we think it’s the best roundtable discussion we’ve recorded in a long time. Megan Almon from Life Training Institute joins us to discuss the recent Planned Parenthood ad that distances itself from the labels “pro-life” and “pro-choice.” While pro-life bloggers discussed the ad when it came out, I felt like we had some unique perspectives to contribute. Discussion topics include the main problems with the argument in the ad, the weaknesses of labels in general, the importance of not stereotyping people and the question of whether moral neutrality is possible on abortion. Josh closes the show with questions for both sides of the abortion debate to consider.

Our favorite (nearly graduated) student from Notre Dame Law John Gerardi is back to help the pro-life community understand why so many faithful Catholics that go to mass every week still voted for President Obama in the 2012 election. Gerardi explains the history of the Catholic church's relationship with the Democratic party and the increasingly uncomfortable position many bishops are in since the Democratic party is so openly pro-abortion rights and anti-religious liberty.

Note from Josh: Life Report has never been an anti-Catholic show, and that hasn't changed. Frankly, a lot of Protestants didn't even vote. But there's no way to have a frank dialogue about this issue without recognizing that the Catholic church in America has had a long relationship with the Democratic party and that relationship is clearly having an impact on elections that effect the rights of unborn babies. We welcomed the chance to have a Catholic expert on the subject explain what he has learned for the benefit of our audience.

Our favorite (nearly graduated) student from Notre Dame Law John Gerardi is back to give us an update on the current status of the different lawsuits against the HHS mandate. We talk about the kinds of entities that are suing and on what grounds, whether it's looking favorable or not and which religious groups have been exempted and why.

Listener Questions:

1. Michael from Tulsa, OK: Will Scientologists get an exemption for all medical treatments that go against their religion now that Priests for Life got an exemption?

Published on the 40th anniversary of the Roe vs. Wade and Doe vs. Bolton decisions that made abortion legal in all 50 states through all nine months of pregnancy for virtually any reason, out interview with pro-life hero Fr. Frank Pavone from Priests for Life was focused on the current state of the pro-life movement.

Questions:

1. What can pro-lifers do to more effectively change peoples minds?
   
2. Why did 43% of church-going  Catholics vote for President Obama in the last election?
3. What have been the pro-life movement’s greatest victory (or victories) so far?
4. What has been the pro-life movement’s greatest failing or weakness?
5. How can we overcome the obstacle of apathy?
6. How should pro-lifers interact with those who are pro-abortion-choice?
7. What single thing should pro-lifers be doing that most are NOT doing right now?
8. What single thing do pro-life people sometimes spend TOO much time doing, when they could be doing something else that’s more effective?
9. Graphic pictures: should we use them, and if so, how, when, and where?
10. Assisted suicide & euthanasia: what should pro-lifers be doing about this, and why?

Questions from Listeners:

1. Patrick in Grand Rapids, MI: "Given the election results, what do we most need to double down on: politics, public education/demonstration, educating the 'people in the pews,' support Pregnancy Resource Centers, something else?"
   
2. JP Prichard from Hanford, CA: "What do you see as being the best ways to promote unity among pro-life organizations and sects?"

Josh and Jonathan Keller finish their interview with Kristi Burkhart, Executive Director of the Fresno Pregnancy Care Center, focusing on the unique relationship our two organizations have and practical advice for people who want to help a girl who has an unplanned pregnancy.

Topics include:

• Why our right to life organization has been able to maintain such a good partnership with the local pregnancy resource center. (Sadly, a rare situation.)
• Common misconceptions that pro-life people have of girls that are pregnant and abortion-vulnerable.
• How can our listeners practically help their friend that suddenly becomes pregnant?
• What are common mistakes that well-meaning pro-life people make when talking to a pregnant teen?
• Should sidewalk counselors offer to adopt the babies of mothers considering abortion?
• Is it true that it's impossible for college students to have kids and stay in school?

We just filmed an interview with pro-life hero Fr. Frank Pavone from Priests for Life for our January 22nd episode. After we were finished, Fr. Pavone agreed to answer one more question geared toward pastors and priests as they prepare for Sanctity of Life Sunday. (January 20th.) Specifically I asked besides the obvious messages on imago dei and the sanctity of human life, what is the most important message for pastors to preach that Sunday morning. What should the congregation walk away with? 

Please forward this video on to your pastor or priest!

Visit ProLifePreaching.com.

Tune into ProLifePodcas.net for the full interview of Father Pavone on January 22nd, 2013.

Josh and Jonathan Keller interview Kristi Burkhart, Executive Director of the Fresno Pregnancy Care Center. This is not just a puff piece about PRC's. Most of our discussion is about the most common accusations leveled at PRC's by pro-abortion-choice people and organizations.

Topics include:

• The National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) says that PRC's give false information about the abortion/breast cancer link, post-abortion syndrome and physical effects of abortion. Kristi explains how her center handles those three topics with their clients.
• What does her center do if a client doesn't want to discuss one of her options? (Parenting, adoption, abortion.)
• How does her center talk about birth control?
• The difference between PRC's under CareNet, NIFLA and Heartbeat International, and "rogue centers" that often have less quality control.

It's the eleventh part of our popular "Responding to Pro-Life Lies Video" series. The video lists 55 “pro-life lies” she’s heard, and in this series, we’re responding to them all.

This was easily the toughest episode in this series to record, because so many of the statements are blatantly hateful. These are the worst statements from that entire video. Josh ends the episode with a plea to pro-lifers be good ambassadors for Christ.

Here are the 8 "pro-life lies" we respond to in this episode:

1. "Abortion is anti-feminist."
2. "Jobs aborted children could have held are taken over by illegal immigrants."
3. "Women who abort should be sterilized."
4. "Childbirth is easy and women who don't want to do it are just lazy."
5. "Planned Parenthood lies to women."
6. "Teen mothers are whores."
7. "No mother would ever kill her child."
8. "Women don't know what they really have."

Stay tuned for the final episode of this series coming soon!

Valerie from Silver Lake, Kansas emailed Life Report to ask for advice on a discouraging debate she had with her pro-choice, Christian father about abortion. Josh continues a three-part video series responding to different aspects of her email, and some of her dad's pro-choice arguments.

This is part three, where Josh discusses...

• how to respond when somebody claims that personhood begins when a baby takes its first breath;
• what to do when the person you're talking to states that their mind is closed on the issue.

Valerie from Silver Lake, Kansas emailed Life Report to ask for advice on a discouraging debate she had with her pro-choice, Christian father about abortion. Josh continues a three-part video series responding to different aspects of her email, and some of her dad's pro-choice arguments.

This is part two, where Josh discusses...

• how to respond when people call the unborn a "potential human being;"
• the claim that life is just a cycle and nothing really begins at fertilization;
• how to use Richard Stith's Polaroid analogy;
• how to define the term "human being."

Valerie from Silver Lake, Kansas emailed Life Report to ask for advice on a discouraging debate she had with her pro-choice, Christian father about abortion. Josh begins a three-part video series responding to different aspects of her email, and some of her dad's pro-choice arguments.

In part one, Josh discusses the most important question when somebody states that the unborn is "not a human being," how to effectively "narrate the debate" when people don't answer our reasonable questions, and a few quick thoughts on Valerie's dad's assertion that the functional DNA of an early embryo is different from the DNA at later stages.

Josh responds to an email from Ashlen who was debating abortion with somebody who responded that parents should have the right to kill their children until they are 18 years old! She wants to know what she should have said.

Josh's response includes comments on what to do when you get stumped or run out of steam and the proper introduction of humor into a dialogue.

Josh responds to a listener email that makes some strong claims about Margaret Sanger. Josh has a different take on Sanger's views and explains why.

Josh responds to an email from someone who isn't finding lots of success using economic arguments for the pro-life position. Her pro-choice friend's response is to reference "Freakonomics" and add that if the country needs more people, we should just open up the borders.

Josh responds to an email from someone who seems frustrated that Josh mis-characterized pro-life people as being uninformed about fetal development. Other topics include late-term abortions, Down Syndrome abortions, post-fertilization age vs. LMP, and the use of the term "pro-aborts."

Josh, Liz and Gabi respond to the story of a pro-choice blogger who wrote some things about sex-selection abortion that was deemed embarrassing by her pro-choice colleagues and publicly berated for it.

Is there an inherent inconsistency in Laurie Penny's article? Can you be both pro-choice and opposed to legal sex-selection abortions? Should the other pro-choice bloggers have responded a different way? What does it mean to have an attitude of seeking truth? How can pro-lifers use this story to start conversations with pro-choice people? These questions and more are discussed on this episode of Life Report.

Josh, Liz and Gabi respond to a listener mail question: how much do pro-life advocates need to know about fetal development to be adequately prepared to have good conversations with lots of pro-choice people?

Ultimately, the team offers two separate lists: the minimal things you NEED to know and the things that will make you an even better advocate.

The team close the show by summarizing the best arguments for the humanity of the unborn and the idea that human beings are valuable in the first place.

Josh and Gabi discuss the difference between moral relativism and libertarianism, in response to a pro-choice blogger who thinks we confused the two in a recent episode about a leaked Planned Parenthood document. After defining the terms, they carefully re-analyze the document to determine the validity of the bloggers accusation.

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.

Trent Horn is back in studio for one more episode, to discuss logical fallacies that both pro-life and pro-choice advocates make.

1. What is logic?
2. How do arguments work?
3. What are fallacies?
4. What are the most common fallacies that pro-choice advocates make?
5. What are the most common fallacies that pro-life advocates make?
6. Most people know that an ad hominem is a fallacy, but they aren’t sure how to describe it or refute it. How do you refute ad hominems?
7. What are some fallacies that people may not recognize but are very common?
8. How can we graciously explain to someone that they are relying on a logical fallacy?
9. Isn't it more important to focus on emotional relationships and not just on who has the best argument?
10. Are there any books you recommend on how to argue and spot fallacies?

Trent talked about a few faulty pro-life arguments in this episode. This is actually a common topic on our show. Click here for more faulty pro-life arguments: http://prolifepodcast.net/tag/faulty-pro-life-arguments/

Watch other Life Report episodes with him at prolifepodcast.net/tag/trent-horn.

Josh responds to a listener mail question asking whether the potential health benefits a mother receives during pregnancy negate bodily rights arguments.

Check out other resources on bodily rights arguments here: http://prolifepodcast.net/tag/bodily-rights

Josh talks about the recent improvements to the functionality of the Life Report website, (ProLifePodcast.net) as well as some changes to how we're responding to listener mail now.

It's Life Report's 150th episode, and Trent Horn is back in studio to discuss how pro-lifers should respond when their discussion of abortion gets down to the "metaphysical basement:" why are human beings valuable in the first place? 

1. Why should pro-lifers be concerned with answering the question “Why do humans matter?”
2. How do pro-life advocates often answer the question?
3. The imago dei is probably the most controversial or least understood reason, how do you understand this reason?
4. Why shouldn't pro-lifers just quote Psalm 139, Jeremiah 1:5 and similar verses to pro-choice people?
5. Can abortion be considered immoral even without reference to God?
6. What do you do if a pro-choice advocate says that you’re imposing your religion on everyone else?
7. Are there some inherent problems with Don Marquis' "future like ours" argument?

Trent Horn is the Coordinator of Respect Life Leadership Support at the Diocese of Phoenix. To learn more about Trent, visit DiocesePhoenix.org. Watch other Life Report episodes with him at prolifepodcast.net/tag/trent-horn.

Trent Horn begins the show with a discussion of what a philosophy is (and isn't) and talks about why pro-life advocates need to study the discipline of philosophy. Issues Trent touches on that need philosophical reflection include:

• Why is killing wrong?
• What is a person?
• Do people have a right to control their own bodies?
• Are morals relative or objective?

Trent then surveys the major philosophical contributions to these issues. (Singer, Marquis, Warren, Thomson, Finnis, Noonan, Schwartz, Beckwith, Kaczor, Tooley.) Finally, he shares how understanding philosophy has helped him have gracious conversations with pro-choice advocates.

Trent Horn is the Coordinator of Respect Life Leadership Support at the Diocese of Phoenix. To learn more about Trent, visit DiocesePhoenix.org.

Pro-life philosopher Trent Horn explains how some pro-choice arguments don't seem so crazy if you view them through the lens of Judith Jarvis Thompson's violinist analogy instead of an anti-personhood worldview. This is very important, because we want to understand where pro-choice people are coming from, and in my experience, more and more of them are coming from a bodily rights case and not only an anti-fetal-personhood view.

Trent Horn is the Coordinator of Respect Life Leadership Support at the Diocese of Pheonix. To learn more about Trent, visit DiocesePheonix.org. Watch other Life Report episodes with him at http://prolifepodcast.net/tag/trent-horn.

More Life Report episodes responding to bodily rights arguments can be found here: http://prolifepodcast.net/tag/bodily-rights

Notre Dame law student and former Life Report guest John Gerardi joins Josh Brahm and Jonathan Keller in the studio to discuss the Supreme Court's "Obamacare" decision. Josh opens the show by focusing on how this legislation promotes abortion and tramples on religious liberty. This includes a brief explanation of why "ella" should definitively be considered an abortifacient, and not merely a contraceptive. Josh also discourages people from making baseless claims about Chief Justice Roberts' intelligence or intentions.

Afterwards, John Gerardi gives a careful analysis of the decision, including what constitutional issues were examined.  The show ends with a discussion of what pro-lifers can do to fix things.

Note from Josh: After this episode finished shooting, we stayed on the air for over an hour continuing the discussion and responding to questions from our live stream audience. We will be releasing that footage in sections over the next week or two, so keep checking ProLifePodcast.net for regular updates, or subscribe to our RSS feed.

Listen to WGSO talk show host Jeff Crouere interview Josh Brahm, asking the following questions:

1. You believe that if they communicate the pro-life position properly, that any pro-life person can go toe-to-toe with any pro-choice advocate, is that right?
2. Don't we see a reduction of abortions across the country?
3. What is it within the pro-choice message that you can find common ground with?
4. You still want to see Roe vs. Wade overturned, right? What would that look like on a national level?
5. California is definitely a hostile state to pro-life causes. Does it help that there's such a large influx of Latino people who are often Catholic, and thus, pro-life?
6. Won't ultrasounds have a dramatic impact on this issue?
7. Is adoption an area where both pro-life and pro-choice people can find common ground?
8. Do you think abortion-minded women realize that there are couples available to adopt their baby?

Callers:

1. "I think it's horrible that the government is using abortion as a political way to control people."
2. "I don't think we should try to find common ground with someone who thinks it's okay to kill a baby!"
3. "The abortion rate is going down because RU-486 isn't being counted."

Josh Brahm interviews local student Jillian and her mom. After interviewing Josh and Kyle, Jillian wrote a paper and gave a pro-life speech to her entire class, and got very positive feedback from her teacher as well as her fellow students. Even more impressive: Jillian is just 14-years-old. Listen to her story here.

Former Life Report co-host Carrie Guy was beloved by many fans. She brought something different to the show, as a youth pastor and a post-abortive pastors kid. 

She had to leave the show last year when she had baby, but she's come back for a special episode to share her story that includes having an abortion as a teen, her recovery process later, and ultimately helping other post-abortive women. 

Carrie also talks about how the modern church is doing responding to the abortion issue as well as tips for talking to pregnant women who are considering abortion. 

Learn more about Carrie and invite her to speak to your group at

http://www.CarrieGuy.com

Josh Brahm responds to listener mail from a fan who's veterinarian co-worker thinks life begins at birth.

Got a question for Josh? Email it to Josh@ProLifePodcast.net.

Eric Scheidler, Executive Director of Pro-Life Action League and Matt Yonke, PLAL Communications Director join Josh via Google+ to discuss the HHS mandate and what pro-lifers can do to stand up for religious freedom via public rallies on June 8th.

Topics covered:

- What is the HHS mandate?

- Why should Christians be concerned about it?

- Is this issue about religious liberty or contraception access?

- Exactly how does the HHS Mandate violate the First Amendment?

- What's being done to fight the HHS Mandate, and where does public protest fit in?

- What were the results of the Stand Up For Religious Freedom Rally on March 23rd?

- Why hold another Stand Up Rally on June 8th?

- What is the next step if the Supreme Court rules against us on "Obamacare?"

Related Links:

- Look up the nearest rally near you:

http://StandUpForReligiousFreedom.com

- Learn more about Eric and Matt's work at the Pro-Life Action League:

http://ProLifeAction.org

- Read the full letter from Notre Dame's president to his staff about the lawsuit against "Obamacare:"

http://goo.gl/sDUAM

Scott Klusendorf is a travelling pro-life speaker who interacts with all the big advocacy groups, as well as Pregnancy Care Centers. He has a unique perspective about the position pro-life advocates are in to make their case right now in history, as well as some observations about Right to Life of Central California that he requested to share in a special Life Report episode.

Josh Brahm retracts his argument in a recent Life Report episode that Ray Comfort begged the question during his 180 interviews.

There are some Christians and even pastors who believe the Bible's silence on abortion means that we should not speak up about the issue. Scott Klusendorf from Life Training Institute deals a devastating blow to this argument.

Topics covered:

- Should pro-lifers defend their view with Psalm 139, Jeremiah 1:5 and others like it?

- A better biblical argument for the pro-life position;

- Responding to the argument that biblically speaking, life begins at "first breath;"

- Responding to the Mosaic law about fighting men that accidentally cause a premature delivery;

- Responding to that weird passage in Numbers 5 with a priest giving a suspected pregnant adulteress a potion that may result in an abortion;

- Responding to the argument that God is the "greatest aborter of history" because so many unborn children die in miscarriages;

- The inherent exegetical danger of modern Christians using directives from Mosaic law or the Old Covenant.

- Evaluating Mark Driscoll's statement that 2nd-trimester John the Baptist leaping in the womb in response to 1st-trimester Jesus is a great biblical argument for the personhood of the unborn child.

For more Scott Klusendorf, check out his website:

http://ProLifeTraining.com

Watch or download the Mark Driscoll sermon Josh referred to here:

http://marshill.com/media/luke/mary-elizabeth

Josh facilitates a discussion with Life Training Institute's Scott Klusendorf and RLCC's Jonathan Keller on pro-life voting principles.

Topics discussed include:

- the current political reality the pro-life movement is in; 
- the different nuances to voting for someone in the Senate, House, and Executive branches;
- voting for third-party candidates;
- the meaning of the word "pragmatic;"
- are all "social justice" issues equivalent?

For more Scott Klusendorf, check out his website:
http://ProLifeTraining.com

Josh, Liz and Andrew begin a two-episode discussion of the popular pro-life documentary, "180," by Ray Comfort and Living Waters Publications. The Life Report team discuss both what they liked about the movie, and then they debate the things they didn’t like. Topics covered in part two include whether or not Ray Comfort begged the question during his interviews and how pro-lifers should use this movie

Josh, Liz and Andrew begin a two-episode discussion of the popular pro-life documentary, "180," by Ray Comfort and Living Waters Publications. The Life Report team discuss both what they liked about the movie, and then they debate the things they didn’t like. Topics covered in part one include the value of taking more time with people and allowing them to "put the puzzle together themselves," and whether or not 180 should be considered a "training film" for pro-life people.

Josh believes that some church leaders are silent about abortion because of ignorance, fear or apathy. Pastor Jim Franklin, pastor of Cornerstone Church in Fresno and Father Larry Toschi from Our Lady of Guadalupe in Bakersfield offer practical advice to pro-life congregants who want to communicate with their church leader about abortion. They close by offering practical advice to pastors on what they can and should do to be a pro-life pastor. (It’s not as much as you might think!)

Pastor Jim Franklin, pastor of Cornerstone Church in Fresno and Father Larry Toschi from Our Lady of Guadalupe in Bakersfield join Josh in the studio to talk about the HHS mandate forcing religious institutions to pay for sterilizations, contraception and the abortifacient drug, "ella."

A Catholic film studio called Spirit Juice Studios released a short pro-life film called "To Be Born" last June. If you haven’t seen it yet, you can watch it for free at ToBeBorn.com, or click the embedded video below. I had the opportunity to interview Ray Kaczmark, the director of "To Be Born," to ask him some questions about the movie.

Assemblywoman Dr. Linda Halderman comes to the studio to discuss a California Senate Bill that would allow non-doctors to perform surgical abortions. Dr. Halderman is a surgeon who can speak with expertise on the problems with the abortion training non-doctors across California have been given for over a year.

Josh, Liz and Andrew have been talking to pro-choice people for years, and every once in a while, they’ve come across some very unique arguments. We discuss how pro-lifers should respond when they come across arguments like these: "How do you know you’re human?" "If I have a tie, and giving you this tie will save your life, I still don’t have any obligation to give you this tie." "Personhood begins when you can visually determine the baby’s gender on an ultrasound." "Abortion is okay because the unborn will be reincarnated into a family that will love them." Correction from Josh: At 14:30 I said that in some states you not only have a moral obligation to dial 911 if you see a mugging going on in the distance, but also a legal obligation. I have not yet finished my research on this subject, but since recording this episode last year, my opinion has changed and I am no longer convinced that there are any state laws that requires anyone to dial 911 in this situation. Whether these laws should exist is another debate. Judith Jarvis Thompson does argue in her famous essay that everyone is morally obligated to do this. It would be the act of a "minimally good Samaritan."

During a recent episode of Life Report, Liz and Andrew became concerned by Josh’s statement that he has "pro-choice friends." Steve Wagner joins the show via Skype to talk about whether pro-life people should have pro-choice friends. What about people that say they’re "pro-life" but in action are effectively pro-choice?

We’ve interviewed Steven Ertelt from LifeNews.com before, but this time Steven came into the studio to discuss the state of the pro-life movement in 2012, personhood bills, and voting principles. Ertelt also gives us an exclusive on a very significant change in Steven’s personal life.

Josh has been doing research and making calls to experts about the front page Chicago Tribune story that there are thousands of unreported abortions in Illinois. After explaining what’s going on, Josh has some questions for pro-choice people to consider, as well as a warning to pro-lifers about how NOT to use this story.

This is the recording of a sermon Josh preached on January 22, 2012 at Free Grace Church in Clovis. After presenting three questions that Christians can answer to bring moral and theological clarity to the abortion issue, Josh takes a hard look at the main reasons that many Christians remain silent on the abortion issue, and how a proper understanding of the Gospel resolves all three of them. Josh closes with the three things that every Christians should do MINIMALLY about abortion.

Many people donate money to the American Cancer Society through their annual Relay for Life events. But the ACS funnels some of that money to killing human embryos for stem cell research. Should this fact cause pro-life people to donate to alternative cancer organizations? Josh thinks so, but Liz and Andrew disagree. Watch the biggest internal debate from Life Report season one.

Topic 1: Satirical Pro-Life Video Depicts Scarlett Johansson in KKK Robe for Promoting Planned Parenthood The Life Report team discusses this question: assuming for sake of argument that PP is in fact a racist organization, is it wise for pro-lifers to make satirical videos like this? Why or why not? Topic 2: Donald Trump’s Pro-Life Views are Grounded in Irrelevance The Life Report team explains why this has got to be the worst attempt ever at grounding the view that abortion should be legal. We close by explaining how YOU could use stories like this to start conversations on abortion with pro-abortion-choice people.

Listener Mail: 1: "Should we use a different word than ‘abortion,’ because that word can also refer to a natural miscarriage?" 2: "One of my friends at school is planning on becoming an embryonic stem cell research scientist. Is there a unique way you would discuss the issue of life with an abortionist or a stem cell researcher?" Includes a discussion on whether you should ever end a friendship with a pro-choice person or stem cell scientist. For more information on stem cell research, visit StemCellAnswers.org

Trent Horn, Director of Youth Outreach with Project Defending Life joins the show via phone to discuss whether emotionally appealing arguments are automatically fallacious. Josh and Trent have both recently been countered by debaters who immediately object whenever they make an argument that pulls on peoples heartstrings. Certainly some appeals to emotion are fallacious, but are all of them? What are common fallacious appeals to emotion that pro-lifers and pro-choicers make while debating abortion?

Jay Watts from Life Training Institute join the Life Report team via Skype for a round table discussion on whether modern day Planned Parenthood is actually a racist organization. Jay offers a brief biography on Margaret Sanger and the two most significant events in her life. In response to the question of whether Sanger was racist, Jay responds that "racist" is too limiting a term for her. Also discussed are the stats that seem to implicate Planned Parenthood in targeting minorities, as well as the location of some of their clinics in minority neighborhoods, and the Live Action Racism Project. Finally Josh offers an alternative explanation for the higher abortion rate in the black community and the location of some Planned Parenthood clinics in minority neighborhoods.

The pro-life community has been buzzing for a week now about the "180" documentary. If you haven’t seen it yet, you can watch it for free at 180Movie.com. I had the opportunity to interview Ray Comfort, the author and filmmaker behind "180," to ask him some questions about the movie. Questions: 1: Ray, how did you come up with the idea for "180?" 2: Was the hidden camera footage legal? 3: What are you hoping to accomplish with the film? 4: Now you often compare abortion to the Holocaust and a lot of pro-lifers do this. Ray, tell me how you respond to people like Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, who doesn’t believe that abortion and Holocaust are comparable? 5: What percentage of people interviewed, not just shown on the movie but interviewed, changed their minds on abortion? 6: You know I do a lot of work with Justice For All and we go out and we train pro-life people to dialogue with pro-choice people about abortion in the most effective ways possible. Would you encourage other pro-life advocates to use hypothetical situations the way that you did when talking to pro-choice people? 7: Your video showed graphic images of the Holocaust. What do you think about the need for pro-lifers to show graphic images of aborted children and how effective do you think they are? 8: A lot of Christian ministries avoid talking about abortion because it is a controversial issue. Based on your experience, do you find that it has been effective to get people to talk about their beliefs? 9: The first 20 minutes of your movie got a really good review from a pro-life non-theist on the secular pro-life blog. But that person was disappointed in the evangelism, last part of your movie. What do you think of non-Christian participation in the pro-life movement? 10: How can pro-life people get involved?

Josh starts the show with a quick rant about annoying people who nitpick other people’s language that aren't "pro-life" enough. As you can guess, this happened to him recently. Afterwards the Life Report team discusses something Justice For All Director David Lee said during Josh’s interview with him. David said that "everybody is a little bit pro-choice." Is this true? Do pro-life people REALLY believe that unborn children are full persons? Do they act like they believe that? Lastly, the Life Report responds to a pro-choice argument Josh had never heard before: "abortion is just a medical treatment for unwanted pregnancy, and medical treatments should be legal."

Josh & Liz respond to questions from the audience. Caller: 1: "Are you pro-life activists because of your belief in God, or because of something else?" Listener Mail: 1: "I think pro-choice bodily rights arguments are all strawmen arguments." 2: "How would you respond to a consistent death ethic, where the person responds that it would even be okay to kill toddlers for that reason?"

Special guests Steve Wagner and Becca Haschke from Justice For All join Josh for a discussion on how pro-lifers can best interact with post-abortive people. We don’t want to make them feel unnecessarily guilty, but we also don’t want to overcompensate and act as if abortion is no big deal.

This is the first of a series of recorded conversations between Josh Brahm and abortion advocates we're going to publish exclusively on this website. It's not an attempt to make pro-choice people look dumb, but an attempt to understand them better, as well as let you hear the arguments and methods we talk about on Life Report used in real time, with real people. Primary Dialogue Topics: 1: Summary of Crystal and Josh's positions on abortion 2: Are the unborn constructed or developed? 3: Is the current capacity for conscious thought necessary for personhood? 4: Is the zygote comparable to bodily cells? 5: What about rape?

Special guests Steve Wagner and Becca Haschke from Justice For All join Josh for a discussion on how to respond to "impossible" pro-choice people.

Josh Brahm interviews Jen Roth, a pro-life philosopher who’s also an atheist and co-founder of All Our Lives. Jen explains how she communicates and defends her pro-life position. Jen also responded to questions from both pro-life and pro-choice live listeners, and closes the show by asking Josh how he grounds his view that humans are valuable. Josh’s Questions for Jen: 1: How would you communicate your pro-life position? 2: How do you respond when a pro-choice person says the unborn are not persons as you and I are? 3: Do you distinguish between humans and all other animals? 4: How would you respond to someone who bites the bullet and concedes that newborns are not valuable people? 5: What about rape? 6: Assuming the unborn are valuable people, how do you respond to the objection that making abortion illegal would you would be violating womens’ bodily autonomy, or bodily integrity? 7: By basic needs, do you mean universal or something else? 8: As an atheist, would the argument that the uterus is designed for pregnancy hold weight? 9: How would you respond if a pro-choicer moves from bodily rights to rape? Does parental responsibility hold up in that case? 10: Some say that not allowing abortions is inherently discriminatory because she could not walk away from the pregnancy in the same way a jerky man could. What do you say to that? 11: And what do you think of the counter that a law prohibiting abortion would not be inherently discriminatory unless it stated that only women could not have abortions (as men could, theoretically, one day become pregnant despite the extreme risk of danger)? 12: Would you consider yourself a moral relativist? 13: How would you respond to the pro-choicer who thinks that we should be able to abort babies that have physical or mental defects? 14: How do you think the way you ground your pro-life argument differs from pro-life theists? Questions from Live Listeners: 1: Would the thought that birth gives us full human rights not be consistent? 2: Even if we concede there is an intrusion going on in the woman’s body, in the case of rape, to remain pregnant against her will, the intrusion against the child’s body in the case of abortion outweighs the intrusion in the case of rape. Is that a good pro-life argument or a bad one? 3: As an atheist, what do you believe makes humans so valuable that all humans, even the unborn, should be protected? 4: As an atheist, from a pro-choicer who believes abortion is permissible from a moral relativist position, how would you answer that objection and say that abortion is never morally permissible?

Josh describes an abortion debate he's having online with someone, who's using philosopher Eileen McDonagh's argument that the fetus is comparable to a rapist, implanting itself in the mother's body without consent, and that the mother has the right to refuse consent and repel the fetus like she would a rapist. How should pro-lifers respond to this fringe version of the bodily rights argument?

Includes caller questions and listener mail on heading off relativism at the start of a conversation, responding to pro-choice questions and Josh takes back something he said in an earlier podcast about ineffective biblical arguments!

1: How Josh's pro-life story started 2: How pro-lifers should use social networking (and how they shouldn't) 3: How can we activate pastors that are afraid of preaching clearly on abortion? 4: How did Life Report get started? 5: Is the pro-life battle a winnable war?

The Life Report team brings back a classic Life Report topic: pro-life bumper stickers. It quickly becomes a debate between Josh and Andrew on what the purpose of a pro-life bumper sticker should be, while Liz, as usual, mediates. Listener Competition: Create your own pro-life bumper sticker and email it to Josh. It can't be based on a bumper stick or slogan already in use. We'll vote on the best bumper sticker in a future episode and the winner will receive a $50 Best Buy gift card!

Guest Co-Host: Christina Dunigan, Pro-Life Researcher/Blogger http://realchoice.blogspot.com/ Caller 1: Isn't claiming that the aborting of disabled babies will shut down the Special Olympics a bad pro-life argument? 2: It seems like our government is turning a blind eye to abortion facilities with low health standard. Do you feel there will ever be a time when our government will take action on this issue? 3: I think it's a good idea to try to understand the motivations of pro-choice politicians. Listener Mail: Antonio from Portugal writes to us with some shocking excerpts about abortion from a sexuality textbook in Spain.

Live Action President Lila Rose and Media Director David Schmidt join Josh to discuss their latest project, IStandWithIndiana.org. They explain why Indiana is the "ground zero" of the abortion battle right now, discuss their project and Planned Parenthood’s reaction to it. They then respond to listener comments & questions, from both pro-lifers and pro-choicers.

Note from Josh: Open Line runs through Skype, and Skype was apparently working very poorly the night we recorded this. Thus, the audio is pretty skippy. You can still follow what we’re saying, but it’s not nearly the same quality you’re used to from Life Report. If you’re willing to be patient with that, I think the content of this show will be helpful to you. From now on, we’ll run a backup recording off our mixer so that if Skype acts stupid again, we can replace the audio straight from our board. Caller Questions: 1: "How would you respond to this pro-choice argument: ‘DNA is like computer code, and many fetuses die before birth because their computer code malfunctions, so we really can’t know if a fetus is human until it’s born.’" 2: "I think the popular pro-life quote, ‘abortion has killed one-fourth of our generation’ is both a false statistic and a poor argument." Listener Mail Questions: 1: "Technically, ‘abortion’ is the termination of a pregnancy following, accompanied by, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus. Because a) this can apply to miscarriages and b) it’s the killing of the child, not the ending of the pregnancy, that we oppose, do you think it would behoove us to use a different word?" 2: "My friend wants to become an embryonic stem cell researcher. Is there any unique way you would discuss the issue of life with an abortion doctor or an embryonic stem cell researcher?" 3: "I was wondering, why some people would oppose reproductive cloning but not therapeutic/research cloning? It seems the one that doesn’t kill people would be preferred."

The Life Report team responds to the concern that by exposing poor pro-life arguments, we are helping pro-choice people win debates with pro-lifers who use those arguments. Are we inadvertently equipping "the enemy?"

Guest Co-Host: Pro-Life Pastor Kristopher Mobbs. Includes listener questions on legislating morality, pro-life warning labels, the burning IVF lab scenario, and a pro-choice listener calls in to ask about whether women might be unjustly prosecuted for miscarriages if abortion becomes illegal.