Seth & Aubrie Drayer

How do pro-life activists share good news? Here's one way.

Geico has a history for clever marketing. One of their commercials , for example, shows what it really would look like to "live under a rock." While having zero knowledge of the savings Geico offers could qualify for one living under a rock these days, another example would be to have heard nothing of Lila Rose, Live Action, and the many investigations into Planned Parenthood. I can imagine the commercial now. "Planned Parenthood covers up statutory rape and sex trafficking of minors." "No way! I didn't know that." "What, have you been living under a rock?" Instead of a neolithic-looking man crawling out from under the rock, though, it would be Nancy Pelosi and President Obama blinking their eyes as they wipe off the dust from blissful hibernation. Something else which has been hard to miss is the PR campaign mounted by Planned Parenthood to combat the efforts of Live Action. While in Florida for the Genocide Awareness Project, I chatted w

On Friday, March 18, 2011, a letter to the editor entitled "Abortion Issue" appeared in the Columbus Dispatch. It is available online here . I elected to rewrite the letter changing only the principal topic---exchanging "toddler killing" for "abortion"---while keeping the rhetoric intact. My rewrite is below. Disclaimer: This is intended to prove a point concerning the prejudice our culture has against the preborn. It is not intended to suggest the religious groups named herein lobby for the act of killing toddlers. The Issue of Killing Toddlers Allow me to surprise some of your readers. I'm a deeply religious person, and I am for the choice of killing toddlers. So are many others in my Presbyterian congregation in suburban Upper Arlington. So are many other deeply religious people and clergy (men and women) that I work with across the state through the Ohio Religious Coalition for Parenting Choice. We come from Judaic, Methodist, Presbyterian,

CatholicVote.org attended the February 2011 "Walk for Choice" in Chicago, Illinois with cameras in hand. The result: the above disturbing video. Present in this fascinating bit of man-on-the-street media is the ever-increasing effort to make abortion "normal." Two young women boldly declare their abortionist ambitions in the video: "I'm so glad to be a future doctor. And I will perform abortions and I'll be proud of it." "There is no shame in abortion. I'm planning on being an abortion provider. I had an abortion a few weeks ago." One man even longs to see Planned Parenthood become "like Starbucks . . . a Planned Parenthood on every corner." When injustice is a mere quotidian occurrence, its continuation is nearly certain. Until the act becomes unthinkable to the public or those in power, very few will act out to end it. How should we best respond to efforts to demystify abortion? Here's one idea: strip away all of

Colleagues and friends of ours are displaying the Genocide Awareness Project at UBC in Canada today. Controversy has already begun. A Facebook Event page for a counter-protest currently shows 429 attending. Here is just one comment from the Facebook page: It is rich indeed for GAP to cry "free speech" when they are the ones trying to takeaway rights from Canadian women. GAP has to resort to shock tactics, and to deliberately misleading facts because, on an even keel, they do not have an argument. The abortion battle has been fought and won on behalf of all women in Canada, no matter how much groups like GAP would like to take us back to the dark ages. As this comment demonstrates, so many arguments for abortion beg the question---that is, they assume what they are trying to prove. The author asserts that GAP is "trying to take away rights from Canadian women." This can only work on a particular assumption: that the preborn is not human. For, if indeed they are h

An article posted today on Care2.com details the painful story of one mother who bore her baby knowing "her child would likely never be able to breathe on its own, would have severely deformed anatomy, and was unlikely even to survive birth at all." The conclusion of the article? It is a far greater crime for a mother to give birth to a "doomed child" than to abort the fetus in utero. Oddly, the author declares quite definitively that the fetus cannot feel pain until after birth, yet states that an abortion could have ended the fetus's suffering. Hmm... The deeper matter, though, is: what do we do with people who are suffering? Would anyone deny that to give birth to a baby only to watch the child struggle for a few hours before dying must be pain of inestimable measure? Surely not. However, does a mother's agony justify her in taking the life of her child? Women who give birth to preemies fighting for their lives may experience great trauma as they wat

Watch these short videos I edited from our recent campus outreach tour!