If you haven’t taken in foster kids, are you justified in objecting to abortion? Greg discusses this topic with a pro-choice caller.
Greg: All right, let’s go to Ann in Mississippi. Ann, welcome to Stand to Reason.
Ann: Thank you. I appreciate it.
Greg: You’re welcome.
Ann: My question would be—I’m not terribly familiar with your show, and maybe this is common knowledge—but I’m curious as to how many foster children you personally are raising in your home and how many the author of this book is raising in his home. I understand your need to value human life, but do you feel any obligation to these children once they’re here?
Greg: Well, I’ll answer the question in a straightforward fashion as to what we are doing, both Scott and I—and I know Scott personally, so I can answer specifically for him. But then I also want to discuss—after I answer it—I want to discuss with you maybe the point behind the question, and I’m sure you’ll be willing to chat about that a little bit.
In my case, I have two children that I’ve adopted out of crisis pregnancies, all right? And Scott has about four of his own, so he hasn’t—maybe, yeah, four of his own—so he hasn’t adopted any; he’s got his hands full. However, what both of us do is we travel around the country, he more than I, and we assist crisis pregnancy training—crisis pregnancy centers, excuse me—in raising funds so that they can offer services free of charge to women who are in crisis pregnancies who choose to keep their children. So we are actually doing quite a bit to meet that particular need. Does the answer satisfy you, Ann?
Ann: I understand your point, and I see that you are directing energy toward your goal—
Greg: Wait, I wasn’t making a point. Ann, I wasn’t making a point; I was answering the question, which was a kind of a challenge. And so I want to know, are you satisfied now that I’m doing enough for those babies that are born since I’m a pro-lifer?
Ann: My personal conviction would be no.
Greg: Oh, so I should, what—how many should I adopt before I can be justified in campaigning against abortion?
Ann: Well, I think you can campaign all you want. I—obviously, nobody thinks it’s a great idea for babies to not be here. I’m not arguing with you—I don’t think anybody in their right mind thinks abortion is a great idea. But I’m, I guess I’m pondering. You all have such focus, and talent, and energy, and obvious resources, and yet the gentleman who was just on the show with you from Atlanta—
Funny enough, I teach in Atlanta, and I have, for instance, a little girl in my classroom this year who’s being sexually molested, who has been covered in lice since the first day of school, who shows up hungry, and yet she can’t be taken from her home because there’s not a foster placement for her, and they do not consider her to be in imminent danger.
Greg: Okay, I’m not sure what that particular point has to do with our prior discussion, first of all. And secondly, I’m still mystified as to why the challenge that you offered me about what am I doing for those children that are born, why my answer—that I regularly raise money for organizations to give help to women in crisis pregnancies, and I’ve adopted two children out of crisis pregnancy myself—I’m wondering why that isn’t in the least bit apparently satisfying to you.
Ann: Well, obviously, you’ve done something, but…
Ann: …but what about those children once those children—
Ann: I’m not—I understand you need to—I’m not trying to offend you. I’m really not. This is a question, though, that always is in the back of my mind when I hear people being…
Greg: No, I understand—
Ann: …militant about these babies need to be brought here, so my question is…
Greg: Well, there’s nothing militant that we’ve done here.
Ann: …where is the obligation if this mother didn’t go through one of your trainings and chose to have this baby, or was not in contact with your—
Greg: Let me answer the question—
Ann: Where are these children being helped?
Greg: Okay, let me answer the question. First of all, it wasn’t a militant presentation. It was a discussion about the moral obligations that we have not to take the life of innocent human beings. Now, what was raised in the process, though, in your question, you know, I understand the point, generally—though you didn’t say this, though, my suspicion is that you meant to infer it, and you can correct me if I’m wrong—that if we are not willing to care for those children that come in the world, then we really don’t have any right to be campaigning against women who want to have abortions. And I don’t accept that moral equation. But even if I did, I have done—I would say—quite a bit to meet the challenge, and that is, to raise funds for people and to adopt children. And it sounds to me like you wouldn’t be satisfied unless I raise funds for every woman in crisis pregnancies or adopted every child, which, obviously, would be ludicrous.
Ann: Obviously, that’s not an option.
Greg: Okay, yes, but then I don’t understand why you’re not at least marginally satisfied, in my case, with my response.
Ann: I will give you that I’m marginally, marginally satisfied with your response—
Greg: Okay, fair.
By the way, Ann, I’m not taking umbrage at the point. My feelings aren’t hurt. I am concerned, though, so I’m not taking this personally, but I am concerned about the logic and reasoning that seems to be sitting behind this, and that is, unless we’re willing to care for those children, then we have no right to tell other women not to kill them. This is not a morally sound equation. Just because I’m not willing to hire a slave doesn’t mean I can’t object to somebody enslaving another human being. Just because I’m not willing to marry the woman that a man is beating, his wife, doesn’t mean that I can’t object to him beating her. And by the same token, if the unborn is a human being, we shouldn’t be taking their lives for the reasons that people have abortions. And even if I don’t adopt all of those kids, I’m still within my rights to say don’t abuse that child. That’s basically my point.
Ann: Obviously, that’s a well-researched argument on your part, and I give you credit for that. And it is logical. It is logical. And yes, just earlier you said these children—I believe the distinction was—the children are made in the image of God, and that is what makes it necessary, obviously, to save all of them.
Greg: No, that’s why we should value their lives, right.
Ann: Yes, that’s why we should—thank you, because I missed your phrasing, and that was better than what I was going to say. Yes, we should value their lives. But does that obligation to value them end—and not you, personally—I guess my question then becomes (it’s now evolving through conversation), is there something in this book, and is there something in your movement, that suggests once people have adopted this philosophy and are going forth to further it, are they doing anything for these children that are already here…
Greg: That’s a fair question.
Ann: …Is that part of the process?
Greg: Yeah, it is. And I’ve actually partially answered that question. You may be surprised to hear this, but there are actually more crisis pregnancy centers in the country than there are abortion clinics.
Ann: Oh, I know that. Now, but what about—
Greg: Wait, Ann, wait, wait, I wasn’t quite finished because I want to make sure that you—that the answer registers before you jump onto another statement, and that is, is there anything in your movement, you asked me, that goes further, essentially, than just says you can’t have an abortion. What about taking care of these kids? And then I said, actually there are more crisis pregnancy centers that are funded by private individuals, not by money they get from their services like abortion clinics, that are doing that very thing.
And by contrast, there is virtually none of those things that are happening like that in the pro-choice crowd. Therefore, the pro-choice crowd is not really pro-choice. It turns out to be functionally pro-abortion. So that statistic alone meets your challenge, it seems to me—the fact that there are all these crisis pregnancy centers that are operating with the funds from people who give money so that women could be cared for for free. So yes, we are doing something. It’s organized. We’ve been doing it for a long time.
Ann: Okay, so once the pregnancy is over and the child is here, how much further contact or how much obligation is there for the rest of this child’s life? How much follow-up is there for these kids? What about children that didn’t go through one of the centers?
Greg: Okay. Yes, I’ll give one more answer to this, and I’m going to have to move on—but also—and the reason that I’m only going to give you one more answer is because I’m getting the feeling that no matter what I said to you, no matter how much is done, no matter how many children are cared for, you can still find someone left behind that you can complain about instead of tipping your hat to a massive number of pro-life people who are doing way beyond—above and beyond—the call of duty to help these children that they’re saying that we should be rescuing and not killing.
So here is the one more thing. My wife, for 20 years—this is personal, it’s my family—has been running a support group for single moms. She calls it the single mom care group. They meet twice a month, they have a potluck, they have encouragement, they have a craft, they have a speaker, they have child care, so they get away. So these are all women who went through crisis pregnancies who are now raising their children, and we are still trying to do what we can for them.
Let me ask you a question just to finish up, and a simple yes or no would be fine. Are you satisfied yet?
Greg: Okay. Fair enough, Ann. I’ll give you the last word. Thank you so much for the call. It was a very—it was a good, and interesting, and challenging one.