Why do women seek abortion? Is abortion truly the best solution to her problems? Is the pro-life movement active in addressing those problems in helpful and empowering ways for women?
Bringing perspective to these difficult yet important questions in this episode of the Know Why Podcast is Chelsey Youman, the Texas State Director and National Legislative Advisor for Human Coalition. Human Coalition uses online marketing strategies to reach women who are considering abortion. When women come in contact with Human Coalition, they’re immediately connected with a licensed nurse who offers support and resources that address the root of the woman’s need.
In her interview with Know Why, Chelsey noted that 76 percent of surveyed women who are seeking an abortion say they would rather parent than if their circumstances were different. “And that’s where our organization began,” Chelsey said of Human Coalition, “helping to fix those circumstances so she could see hope.”
“Does she really want [an abortion], or does she feel like she doesn’t have any other choice?”
Know Why Podcast
While every woman’s set of circumstances is unique, Chelsey said they see some consistent themes among women who reach out to Human Coalition and are considering abortion. Those include the need for emotional support, pressure from others including male partners and even family members, the costs of childcare, and lack of housing.
There are over 2,400 pregnancy resource centers in the nation that are dedicated to helping pregnant women in need. Human Coalition connects women with local pregnancy centers. It also offers a Continuum of Care program with 7,000 resources available to create an individualized care plan for each woman that will help her gain stability and independence. Several states, including Texas, have also agreed to provide assistance programs for pregnant women and parents after their children’s birth or adoption.
“It is always the right thing to say that innocent human life is worthy of protection.”
Chelsey Youman
These charitable and government resources aren’t often covered in the media, Chelsey said. When asked what pro-lifers could do to better help women, she responded that the church could be more involved in helping pregnant women and offering support to post-abortive women.
If you want to learn more about Human Coalition, the resources available to pregnant women, and the resources available to parents through Human Coalition’s Continuum of Care, click on the links below.
The Pregnancy Network — If you are pregnant or parenting a child age 3 and under, find out if you are eligible for assistance with childcare costs, food assistance, healthcare, housing, and more.
Today’s generations aren’t oblivious to the problems of the past. In recent years, young people in America have participated in important cultural conversations about our nation’s history and how we look at it. Part of that has included questioning whether certain historical figures or other aspects of our history are worth studying, remembering, or honoring.
On this episode of the Know Why Podcast, Richard Lim offers helpful perspective about human nature and the study of history. Richard is the host of “This American President,” a history podcast that delves into the lives and legacies of the men who have occupied the White House.
“The human condition is such that we should understand that everyone is problematic to an extent.”
Richard Lim, Host This American President
Richard told Know Why Podcast that in his study of history, he’s found no perfect people. “The more you study a person, the more you realize how human they are,” he said.
But that doesn’t mean we can’t learn from those figures or acknowledge their accomplishments. But how should we balance the ugly sides of a person’s life with what they accomplished? Does one outweigh the other? “I think you have to study the core of an idea,” Richard told Know Why. He continued:
“Say the American Revolution. The core of the idea was the idea that all men are created equal. It was the first time any group of people had ever said that. Now again, they weren’t perfect. They were dealing with problems of the old world that were very difficult to deal with, like slavery. But was the cause good? Absolutely. It was a great cause. It was the best cause you could have had at that time.”
“If we’re looking for the perfect cause, the perfect movement, and we aren’t going to study anything short of that, you’ve got nothing to study.”
Richard Lim, Host This American President
While ideas and historical figures can be celebrated for the positive things they’ve contributed to the world, people can go too far by glorifying eras or movements from the past that were wrong.
It’s a mistake to avoid studying history, even when certain figures are problematic. Studying problematic people, ideas, and movements can help us avoid making similar mistakes today.
Ben Bennett is the Director of the Resolution Movement, a speaker, and the co-author of Free to Thrive: How Your Hurt, Struggles, and Deepest Longings Can Lead to a Fulfilling Life. In this episode of the Know Why Podcast, Ben talks with Liberty about his personal journey from struggling to thriving—and how both brain science and biblical truth offered breakthroughs.
Millennials and Gen Z: Hurting Like Never Before
In 2019, 70% of teens said anxiety and depression are major problems amongst their peers according to Pew Research Center.
In the last five years, some research has shown that young adults are 63 times more lonely than those over 75 years old.
Only 4% of Gen Z hold to a biblical worldview, and is historically the least religious generation in American history.
Suicide is a leading leading cause of death among young people.
Ben also noted that few pastors report feeling very well equipped to help people with their mental and emotional struggles. As someone raised in the Christian church, Ben felt this personally. As he began dealing with multiple mental health issues and addictions, he felt alone and thought he would struggle forever.
“I had this cocktail of compulsions trying to survive, trying to deal with life.”
Ben Bennett Resolution Movement
“I had this cocktail of compulsions trying to survive, trying to deal with life,” Ben told Know Why Podcast. “I was trying everything I was hearing from Christians at the time but it just didn’t seem to work.”
Neuroplasticity: Renewing Your Mind
What Ben details in his book Free to Thrive with co-author Josh McDowell is that often, addictions, “unwanted behaviors,” and mental health struggles are humans’ attempted solutions to fill unmet longings. Everyone has ingrained longings such as acceptance. Not getting those longings fulfilled can trigger unwanted responses.
But those responses can be overcome by creating new pathways in your brain.
“Brain scans show that through repeated thoughts and actions, changes happen in the brain. The things you used to struggle with you no longer struggle with. New pathways are grown and developed.”
Ben Bennett Resolution Movement
“I just saw anxiety in my life go down by about 90 percent,” Ben said, “And what I realized was happening was, I was being transformed by the renewing of my mind (Romans 12:2), and neuroplasticity—brain scans show that through repeated thoughts and actions, changes happen in the brain. The things you used to struggle with you no longer struggle with. New pathways are grown and developed.”
Listen to the full episode to hear Ben explain neuroplasticity more and how it helped him overcome food addiction, pornography addiction, and anxiety when the well-meaning advice of others couldn’t. Ben also challenges listeners to think differently about Christianity, even if they have experienced legitimate hurts from Christians.
“It’s not that the bad’s not bad,” he told Know Why Podcast. “It’s that the good is too good to walk away from.”
So it’s not surprising that young adults are basing more and more of their life decisions on climate change — including whether or not to have kids.
Many young adults are worried that having children will overburden a planet that’s already overpopulated and further damage the environment.
They’re also worried about what kind of environment their kids will be born into.
Is this a valid concern — and if not, why not?
What We’ve Been Told
For most of our lives as millennials and members of Gen Z, we’ve been told our every action will affect climate change. As we’ve gotten older, we’ve been told by some that having kids is one of the worst things we can do for the environment.
“Before I got pregnant, I worried feverishly about the strain on the earth’s resources that another Western child would add. … But I also worried about the sort of world that I would bring my child into… Could I really have a baby, knowing that by the time he was my father’s age, he may be living on a dry and barren earth?”
Impending Doom? Not Exactly
These fears about having children and contributing to climate change are based on the worst-case scenarios. And in the media, the most alarming information often gets the most attention. People are drawn to bad news, so that’s what goes viral.
But a key characteristic of millennials and Gen Z is that we’re skeptical. So let’s engage some healthy skepticism and consider whether the climate change alarmists may not have a monopoly on the facts.
“Twelve years isn’t a deadline, and climate change isn’t a cliff we fall off — it’s a slope we slide down… even under a business-as-usual scenario, the world isn’t going to end in exactly twelve years.”
Kate Marvel, Climate Scientist Axios
A 2019 report from Axios quotes several scientists who agree that climate change is a problem that needs to be addressed, but disagree that the 12-year-doom deadline is an accurate way to frame the issue.
For instance, Kate Marvel, a climate scientist at NASA, told Axios, “12 years isn’t a deadline, and climate change isn’t a cliff we fall off — it’s a slope we slide down… even under a business-as-usual scenario, the world isn’t going to end in exactly twelve years.”
Here’s another quote in the Axios report, from Andrea Dutton, a paleoclimate researcher at the University of Florida:
“For some reason the media latched onto the 12 years (2030), presumably because they thought that it helped to get across the message of how quickly we are approaching this and hence how urgently we need action. Unfortunately, this has led to a complete mischaracterization of what the report said.”
Gavin Schmidt, who also works for NASA, said, “The thing to push back against is the implicit framing that there is some magic global mean temperature or total emissions that separate ‘fine’ from ‘catastrophic’. There just isn’t.”
These are scientists who believe climate change is a severe problem that needs to be addressed. But they reject the idea that we’re going to enter the apocalypse if we don’t reach a certain global temperature by 2030.
Mother Earth: Overcrowded or Plenty of Space?
Even if environmental doom isn’t coming in 12 years, are we going to run out of room and resources to take care of more humans if people keep having kids? In short, no. Let’s examine why.
Overpopulation fears are not new. Today’s overpopulation fears can be traced to Thomas Robert Malthus, an English scholar from the 19th Century.
Malthus believed the human population would grow at a faster rate than food production. This would lead to mass starvation, among other problems. He argued that the only solution was to curb population growth. Overtime, this resulted in cruel population control tactics.
Time proved Malthus wrong. The next century brought important industrial inventions. As a result, food production significantly increased. Sometimes it even outpaced population growth.
Even so, fears about overpopulation reemerged.
In the late 1960s, Paul Ehrlich published The Population Bomb. Echoing Malthus, Ehrlich predicted that the world was on the brink of running out of food and other resources. Since then, overpopulation fears have persisted.
Both Malthus and Ehrlich got something wrong. They underestimated our ability as humans to adapt to growth. Thanks to human ingenuity, we aren’t limited to the earth’s natural resources. And we don’t have to fear running out.
“The conditions that sustain humanity are not natural and never have been. Since prehistory, human populations have used technologies and engineered ecosystems to sustain populations well beyond the capabilities of unaltered “natural” ecosystems.”
In response to that British Vogue mentioned above, Peter Jacobsen, Assistant Professor of Economics at Ottawa University, made some interesting counterpoints.
For instance, he points to research that shows access to food and resources increased as population rose.
He also takes issue with one of the points Nell Frizzle makes in her British Vogue column, that air pollution now kills more people than tobacco, AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis. But the truth is that air pollution deaths are actually decreasing, but deaths from all those other causes are also falling, just at a faster rate.
“We found that humanity is experiencing what we term Superabundance – a condition where abundance is increasing at a faster rate than the population is growing. Data suggests that additional human beings tend to benefit, rather than impoverish, the rest of humanity.”
Human Progress
And this is where Jacobsen makes another really key point—a lot of times, air pollution rises as a nation develops out of poverty, but then often decreases.
As countries develop they tend to pollute more to get out of poverty, but as they grow rich they are able to afford to have even cleaner air than they did before development. … In fact, the above data shows there is less air pollution in London today than in 1700.
He also points to HumanProgress, an organization that publishes data from scholars, academic institutions, and global organizations on the state of humanity worldwide. Here’s what they found when studying the relationship between the world’s population and the world’s resources:
“We found that humanity is experiencing what we term Superabundance – a condition where abundance is increasing at a faster rate than the population is growing. Data suggests that additional human beings tend to benefit, rather than impoverish, the rest of humanity.”
They quote the late economist Julian Simon, who argued:
“Adding more people will cause [short‐run] problems, but at the same time there will be more people to solve these problems and leave us with the bonus of lower costs and less scarcity in the long run.… The ultimate resource is people—skilled, spirited, and hopeful people who will exert their wills and imaginations for their own benefit, and so, inevitably, for the benefit of us all.”
From Overpopulation Fears to Human Rights Abuses
Throughout history, overpopulation fears have led to atrocities.
Shortly after The Population Bomb was published, the U.S. helped found the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA). The UNFPA now posits itself as an agency for reproductive heath. Historically, however, it has participated in morally repugnant population control tactics.
For example, the UNFPA had a hand in China’s infamous one-child policy that only ended in 2015. For decades it caused major human rights abuses, from sex-selective abortions to forced sterilizations. As a result, China now suffers from a dramatic gender imbalance a rapidly aging society.
When we are creators and stewards, we become aware of the infinite series of threads connecting us to the world around us — aware of the fragility and beauty of life, the preciousness of it. That is not an instinct, in my mind, which makes us less likely to fight climate change — but rather, more eager to seek to regenerate and heal our planet, and more likely to teach our children to do the same.
Elizabeth Bruenig is an award-winning journalist who made Forbes’ 30 under 30 list in 2019 and was a Pulitzer Prize finalist the same year. She wrote for The Washington Post in in 2019:
“Every child is born to risk…it’s impossible to be sure of anything except that life is not permanent and is prone to radical, sudden revolutions.”
In short, if you’re looking for a time to have kids when they are guaranteed not to have dramatic problems to face at some point in their future, you’ll never find that time.
Bruenig also makes another interesting point about respect for life and respect for the planet, and how they’re actually connected:
“It also appears to me that a certain disrespect for human life is how we arrived in the climactic fix we’re in now. … the culprits of climate change are not pro- but anti-humanity, and that it’s their ethos which inclines to nihilism, despair and death. Children are a clear statement of hope, a demand that we claim accountability for the future. They are a rejection of cavalier disregard for the planet we share.”
Olmstead and Bruenig are not dismissing the need to be environmentally conscientious. They simply argue that bringing human life into the world can be part of the solution.
If you’re looking for a time to have kids when they are guaranteed not to have dramatic problems to face at some point in their future, you’ll never find that time.
And interestingly, this is similar to the conclusion that Nell Frizzle reaches in her British Vogue column, despite her dramatic opening about whether having kids is “environmental vandalism.” Nell herself is a mother, and this is what she writes:
I also believe that when it comes to the future health of the planet, the question is not one of whether or not we continue to have babies. People will always have babies. … Instead, it is a question of how we raise those babies…As someone who is attempting to raise a child with an awareness of ecological inequality, who tries to satiate his desires with human interaction rather than material consumption, who helps him appreciate the natural world, I hope that my son might contribute to future humanity, rather than destroy it.
And all of these perspectives from young mothers really align with the arguments of Julian Simon, cited at Human Progress:
.… The ultimate resource is people—skilled, spirited, and hopeful people who will exert their wills and imaginations for their own benefit, and so, inevitably, for the benefit of us all.
Know Why
Millennials and Gen Z care about causes, care about other people, and are willing to shape our lives around our convictions, including taking care of the planet.
But it’s important to truly know why we’re making a change in our lives. If young adults are resisting having kids when we otherwise would just because of environmental concerns, we may not be basing that major life choice on legitimate evidence.
Interview with Jonathan Teague, Sr. Associate Pastor of Prestonwood Baptist Church
Gallup reported in 2021 that church membership in the United States dropped below 50 percent. This is new for Americans, who have traditionally reported high rates of church membership and attendance.
Church membership isn’t just dropping because fewer people identify as religious now. Even among people who still identify with a religion, fewer are members of churches, synagogues and mosques.
“Pew researchers concluded that people who regularly participate in religious congregations tend to be happier and more civically engaged than their peers who are infrequent attendees or don’t identify with a religion at all.”
Carol Kuruvilla, Religion Reporter HuffPost
This leads Know Why Podcast to ask the questions, does church attendance matter at all? For those who aren’t religious or church attenders—what’s missing? For those who are religious, why not worship at home?
On this episode, Liberty and Jonathan Teague, Sr. Associate Pastor of Prestonwood Baptist Church, share research that highlights several benefits of attending a house of worship. Jonathan also shares more about what a Christian church community should look like according to the Bible.
Happier in Church?
From a research standpoint, there is significant evidence revealing that those who frequent the pews are better off — and not just in the United States:
“But,” Pew found, “the analysis finds comparatively little evidence that religious affiliation, by itself, is associated with a greater likelihood of personal happiness or civic involvement.”
The social aspect of attending religious services likely plays a big part. According to Pew, “those who frequently attend a house of worship may have more people they can rely on for information and help during both good and bad times.” T. M. Luhrmann wrote for The New York Times, “At the evangelical churches I’ve studied as an anthropologist, people really did seem to look out for one another.”
“Although social activity seems to be a key driver of well-being among religiously active people, there is plenty of research to suggest that other factors play a role, too. Some researchers argue that virtues promoted by religion, such as compassion, forgiveness, and helping others, may improve happiness and even physical health if they are practiced by parishioners.”
The New York Times reported recently that with church attendance dropping in America, people are losing community that is important to humans’ health and wellbeing. That community isn’t getting replaced with secular activities, according to sociologists.
When Jonathan asks young adults what they hope to find in a church, here’s what he hears:
“More often than not, what they talk about is … being known, being loved, having a place where they can serve, having a place where they can find not only community, but identity, and finding a place where they have value and they get to participate in increasing value. And the good news is, the Scripture lends itself to all those things.”
“If you’re looking for—ideally—the friendliest, most loving, faithful place, you should find it in a church,” he added, noting that it’s up to Christians and ministers to keep those promises of what church is supposed to be according to Scripture.
And Christians often get it wrong. Jonathan notes that millennials and Gen Z don’t have a problem with the teachings of Jesus as much as they have a problem with Christians’ behavior. That’s why it’s up to Christians and ministers to keep the promises of what Christian community and churches is supposed to be.
“I think the majority of young adults, I think the majority of young millennials, they’re pretty cool with the ideas of Jesus, this whole idea of love and service and sacrifice and helping others and healing others.”
Jonathan Teague, Sr. Associate Pastor Prestonwood Baptist Church
What Does the Bible Say?
Biblical churches should be faithful, built on truth, and have members that actually care for one another, Jonathan told Know Why. And while many people believe in God without attending religious services, the Bible emphasizes church membership as fundamental part of Christian life.
“Every letter in the New Testament assumes Christians are members of local churches. … They teach us how to get along with other members, how to encourage the weak within the church, how to conduct ourselves at church, and what to do with unrepentant sinners in the church. … All these things are impossible if you aren’t a member of a local church.”
Women want “half the pie,” and abortion doesn’t give it to them. That’s what Destiny Herndon-De La Rosa, founder and president of New Wave Feminists, asserts in this episode of the Know Why podcast.
Feminism is defined as “belief in and advocacy of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes expressed especially through organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests.”Today, however, it can seem like the word “feminism” has a lot more attached to it.
But that event also highlighted the growing number of women who consider themselves “pro-life feminists.” Like other feminists, they fight for equality of the sexes. But they argue abortion contributes more to women’s inequality than liberation.
“That’s why society as a whole thinks we need abortion, cause it’s a cop-out,” Destiny said. “It allows us to retain these patriarchal structures of a world that was built for men, by men, and doesn’t accommodate womanhood.”
“There is this level of underlying resentment towards women in corporate America and in Academica whenever they do continue a pregnancy,” Destiny told Know Why.
Bodily Autonomy From Existence?
But what about the argument that women have a right to bodily autonomy? Pro-life feminists agree, but point to scientific evidence that from fertilization, the fetus is a genetically unique human being, with a body distinct from its mother’s.
“When it comes to issues like bodily autonomy, I think you should have it the moment your body first exists,” Destiny said. “Women have been treated as property for most of millennia, and so you have this new kind of rise of rights and liberation, but are we becoming the patriarchy ourselves? Are we now treating another subset of the human family as property based on their vulnerabilities?”
Seeing Them Both
On its website, New Wave Feminists asserts that “no woman ever wants to have an abortion.” A study by the Guttmacher Institute found that most women abort because “having a baby would dramatically interfere with their education, work or ability to care for their dependents, or they could not afford a baby at the time.”
“The pro-life side, a lot of times they see one person; they see the unborn child. And the feminist side sees one person; they see the woman,” Destiny said in a documentary called “Pro-Life Feminist.” “But pro-life feminists see two people. We want to protect and support two people.”
Does science conflict with the Bible? In this episode of the Know Why Podcast, Jonathan Witt, Executive Editor of Discovery Institute Press, notes that many scientists throughout history and today profess faith in God, even arguing that scientific study points to his existence.
Famous Scientists Who Were Also Religious
“The Christian worldview actually gave birth to science,” Jonathan told Know Why Podcast. The Judeo-Christian worldview prevalent in renaissance Europe “fired the imaginations and it ordered the reasoning of those that gave birth to the scientific revolution.”
In the 16th Century, Anglican thinker Sir Francis Bacon developed the scientific method, which uses experimentation and inductive reasoning to learn more about the natural world.
In the 17th Century, Galileo, a Christian, advanced groundbreaking discoveries, including that the earth revolved around the sun, and argued that science does not contradict the Bible.
“There are scientists in our age who see nature, see even recent discoveries pointing to God intelligent design, pointing to evidence of a God,” Jonathan said, mentioning Nobel Prize winning physicists Arno Penzias, 90, and Charles Townes (1915-2015) as examples.
Francis Collins, former director of the National Institutes of Health and a leading scientist in DNA research, is a current example of a prominent scientist vocal about his Christian faith.
There are plenty more examples of men and women combining faith and science throughout history and today. Modern scientists aren’t as hostile to religion as people may think. Many scientists around the world acknowledge the possibility of a spiritual realm. And the majority of people working in science-related fields are religious.
Understanding the Bible
Still, sometimes scientific discoveries seem to go against something the Bible says. That’s why it’s important to understand what the Bible is.
The Bible claims to be the true, authoritative word of God, given to human authors to write down throughout multiple centuries and locations. It contains poetry, prophecies, parables, genealogical records and historical accounts. Combined, these writings tell the story of God and his love for humanity.
The Bible never claims to be a comprehensive textbook of science or history. So when reading books within the Bible, it’s important to consider their historical, literary, and cultural context in order to interpret them correctly — something theologians have been doing (and sometimes disagreeing about) for centuries. For instance, the Bible claims that God created the universe, but even Christians often disagree about how he created it.
Where Christians will land in this debate depends on their interpretation of Genesis. Genesis is the first book in the Bible, and its first two chapters focus on creation. According to the biblical creation account, God created the universe in six days, with man being his final creation.
Theistic evolutionists argue the story of creation is meant to be symbolic or allegorical — that the six days of creation actually represent ages of time during which evolution took place under God’s guidance. Others, called creationists, hold that the story of creation is literal. They believe the six days of creation were actually six 24-hour days, and that God created all living things by speaking them into existence.
As Jonathan acknowledged on Know Why, “Whereas God is infallible and his Word is infallible, our understanding of Scripture is not necessarily infallible.”
People of faith are free participate in either political party and advocate their convictions, but Christians often don’t speak out when their party is wrong. That’s what Justin Giboney, attorney, political strategist, and president of the AND Campaign argues in this episode of the Know Why podcast.
The United States has seen dozens of political parties and multiple party systems throughout history. Today, American politics are largely dominated by two major parties, the Democratic and Republican parties.
Unchanging Values
So which party does God belong to? None of them.
According to the Bible, God and his values are eternal and unchanging. By contrast, earthly politics change constantly. Even the platforms of today’s two major parties evolve year by year.
So, people of faith shouldn’t worry when a political party they don’t like prevails, thinking that it interferes with God’s will. The Bible teaches that no purpose of God’s can be thwarted.
‘Be About Righteousness and Justice’
“You got to read the prophets,” Justin told Know Why. “What we know about the government from Genesis on is that it’s God-ordained. However, you got to remember that God is absolutely sovereign, but he also does a lot of his work through us. And so you see Amos, and you see Isaiah, and you see these people [in the Bible] going to government and going to people in power and saying, ‘You’re not doing the right thing.’ So although it’s God-ordained and God is sovereign, he works through us. … He has an expectation that we’ll be about righteousness and justice. In fact, he’s appalled when we’re not doing that work.”
Many Christians will argue that their favorite political party does these things better than the rest. Who is right? The truth is that different parties, politicians, or policies may reflect different parts of God’s value system at different times.
“We live in a broken world and as part of that the parties that we’re in are broken,” Justin said. “And so I would say that both parties fall well short of where the gospel would have us to be.” He mentions both abortion and racial justice as examples of where Democrats and Republicans have fallen short of biblical values.
That’s why Christians’ main allegiance should be to God, and not one party or person. Earthly political parties are sure to change, but God’s values never will.
Find other resources mentioned in this episode below:
