Ideas Have Consequences

What is an Abortion Abolitionist? | Bradley Pierce

• Disciple Nations Alliance • Season 2 • Episode 59

Share episode

Send us a text

Could the pro-life movement be missing the mark in its fight against abortion? Join us as Bradley Pierce, a constitutional attorney and president of the Foundation to Abolish Abortion, challenges conventional thinking with his abolitionist perspective. With deep conviction and significant legal experience—including his role in the landmark Dobbs v. Jackson case that overturned Roe v. Wade—Bradley shares his mission for the total abolition of abortion in the United States. He questions the effectiveness of traditional pro-life strategies and advocates for legal reforms that more closely align with biblical principles.

We examine the state of abortion law in America post-Dobbs, where rising access to abortion pills online complicates enforcement efforts. This episode also tackles the controversial issue of equal protection in abortion laws, a divisive topic even within the pro-life movement. We explore its legal and moral implications, urging Christians to always apply a consistent biblical worldview in shaping culture and policy.

Bradley Pierce:

Abortion is legal in all 50 states today. Every single baby in this country can be legally aborted by his or her mother in every single state in America today. So we've got a long ways to go.

Luke Allen:

Hi friends, welcome to Ideas have Consequences. The podcast of the Disciple Nations Alliance. Here on this show we examine how our mission as Christians is to not only spread the gospel around the world, to all the nations, but our mission also includes to be the hands and feet of God, to transform the nations to increasingly reflect the truth, goodness and beauty of God's kingdom. Tragically, the church has largely neglected this second part of her mission and today most Christians have little influence on their surrounding cultures. Join us on this podcast as we rediscover what it means for each of us to disciple the nations and to create Christ-honoring cultures that reflect the character of the living God.

Scott Allen:

Well, welcome again everyone to another episode of Ideas have Consequences. This is the podcast of the Disciple Nations Alliance. I'm Scott Allen, I'm the president of the DNA and we're thrilled to have you join us again for another episode and especially grateful today to have with me my co-workers and friends Luke Allen Dwight Vogt. Have with me my co-workers and friends Luke Allen, dwight Vogt, and our special guest today is Bradley Pierce Bradley. Thank you so much for taking time to be with us on Ideas have Consequences.

Bradley Pierce:

Thank you for having me. It's great to be with you.

Scott Allen:

It's awesome to have you, bradley is. I'll give a brief introduction here, bradley, and then we'd like to have you, since you're a new guest on our podcast, like to have you share a little bit more between the lines here. I think the thing is I was looking at your bio. That stood out to me amongst other things it's a very impressive bio is that your Christian husband, cindy, is your wife and your father to 11 children. That's a big family.

Bradley Pierce:

It is actually. I just updated that because we were expecting number 12. Oh my gosh, hey, congratulations. Thank you, we're very, very blessed.

Scott Allen:

You take your pro-life position very seriously and I honor that I respect that.

Scott Allen:

So good for you. That's great Glory to God, amen. Well, bradley's a constitutional attorney and you can tell, as you can tell by all the books behind him there. He is also the president of an organization called the Foundation to Abolish Abortion, and that's kind of what we're going to talk with you about a little bit, bradley. What is that and that movement? A little bit more today.

Scott Allen:

But just to give you a little bit more on the bona fides he has drafted legislation in more than 30 states supporting self-defense rights, parental rights, civil liberties and the right to life, including drafting dozens of equal protection bills filed to abolish abortion. Again, we'd like to get into that a little bit. Bradley has been admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court where, on behalf of 21 organizations and 20 state legislatures from across the country, the United States, he has filed a brief in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization the famous Dobbs case that abolished Robs v Jackson Women's Health Organization, the famous Dobbs case that abolished Roe v Wade. So that's so exciting that you had a hand in that. Yeah, so that—anyways, that gives our listeners a little bit of who you are. But, yeah, give us a little bit more Bradley, if you don't mind, kind of, how did you get into the ministry, the work that you're doing today?

Bradley Pierce:

Yeah well, thank you. There were 81 briefs total filed in Dobbs a very, very tiny part to play in that but, we can come back to kind of the details of that.

Bradley Pierce:

But you know, I'm grateful about just a little bit of background on me. I'm a Christian saved by the grace of God. That's the most important thing about me and that's why I try to do what God's called me to do, which is love Him and love my neighbor, and try to do that in the way that he's told us to do that and do that as he defines love. And yeah, I was raised Christian home. Parents are pro-life, I've always been pro-life and then started to see some issues with the pro-life movement and that led me to kind of where I am today. But yeah, I'm a homeschool graduate. My parents homeschooled me, graduated in the year 2000. So I'm like a senior millennial is what I tell people. And um, and then, yeah, now we homeschool our, our uh, 12 children. Uh, I always, I like to say, homeschooling begins at conception and so, uh, so we're doing that and uh, so we're, we're grateful to do that Good for you.

Scott Allen:

Yeah, we, we are a homeschool family as well, and so you're looking at another homeschool kid there with Luke. Awesome, how'd you get into law?

Bradley Pierce:

You know I had wanted to get into architecture From the time I was nine years old. I wanted to be an architect. Actually, my grandfather had a roofing business that became roofing and siding, and then roofing and remodeling and then general construction, and I did all those things growing up with him and with my uncle, and then my dad is an electrician.

Bradley Pierce:

So you know, I just kind of grew up around that industry and really I wanted to be an architect. I had like a drafting table. My parents got me when I was 11 years old, but as a homeschooler, my mom, I remember when I was 12 years old she said, all right, you got to keep doing math and you have to keep doing English, because those are on the SAT and you're going to go to college, because you're going to be the you know, you and your brother, first generation in our family, go to college. You're going to do that. Um but um. But beyond that, what do you want to do? And I said I want to do history books.

Bradley Pierce:

And so at the homeschool book fair got tons of history books and just developed a love for history. And then there was a historian who came to our church one time and he was talking about how founding fathers and American War for Independence and things like that, some of the things that I really loved, and he talked about kind of where we are as a country today or then I guess this would be when I was 16 years old, back in 1988, I guess, not 1998, I'm sorry and anyway I just really felt in a call because he said you know, we need godly judges, we need godly lawyers in this country, not just lawyers who are Christians, but Christian lawyers, lawyers who will bring biblical worldview into the practice of law. And I just felt then a call that this is what I was supposed to do, and I'd had people telling me or encouraging me this direction, because I like to argue with people and so they were encouraging me this direction. So that's where it started, when I was 16 years old, and I'm still doing it.

Scott Allen:

Huh, wow, I wasn't going to ask this question, but you prompted in my mind. You made a distinction between Christians who are practicing law, and how did you frame it?

Bradley Pierce:

Right Christian lawyers versus lawyers who are Christians.

Scott Allen:

Christian lawyers versus yeah, talk a little bit more about that, can you who are Christians?

Bradley Pierce:

Christian lawyers versus yeah, talk a little bit more about that, can you? Yeah, well, you know, I think that you know. Sometimes we can say, well, I'm a Christian, but that's private, you know, I keep that to myself. That's just my only private relationship with Jesus and that, yes, I'm a moral person, but it doesn't really impact my vocation and things like that, Whereas that's not where I am and that's not where I think Christians should be.

Bradley Pierce:

I think that we should, as Proverbs 3 says, we should be acknowledging Him in all of our ways. He's the Lord, not just of our heart and our mind, but also our vocation and everything, our country and our government and everything that we do. He's the king of kings. He certainly cares about the law, he has a lot of law and he has a very strong will and commands on that subject, and so it's an area that, just like we seek to bring our own minds into conformity with his words, we should seek to bring everything around us into conformity with that, and so that goes for the law as well, and so that's what I believe that all of us should do, in whatever vocation we are Do it all for the glory of God, do His, you know, seeking to acknowledge Him in all of our ways.

Scott Allen:

I just find that really refreshing, bradley. So I just wanted to, yeah, just pause on that a little bit. I think that's still a minority kind of view in the Church, isn't it? I still think that there's this very prominent view that you know occupations or vocations like law or politics, or you name it you know almost any of them are secular. These are secular vocations and Christians can practice in those vocations and should practice in those vocations. But the way that those vocations are framed and done and the basic rules of the game are all set by secular leaders in, you know, legal studies and legal universities and whatnot, and the job of Christians is just to work as lights and, you know, share the gospel as there's opportunity within those vocations.

Scott Allen:

But I'm struck by how earlier generations of Christians I'm talking a couple hundred years ago they really read the scriptures with the understanding that, first of all, jesus is Lord, not just over the church building but the whole of society, and that the scriptures apply to the whole of society. And you know there's, as Abraham Kuyper said, not a single square inch. You know, of what Jesus doesn't say. This is mine, and so the way that it applies is that you have to read the Bible to uncover these basic truths, foundational truths, principles that shape how a Christian ought to think about law, like, let's say, it's not the same way that a secular person would think about law. And so again, I'm preaching to the choir here, I know, but I'm refreshed to hear you say that, because don't you think that's still kind of a minority view in the Church?

Bradley Pierce:

I think it is, but yeah, it's more recent, it's more of a modern view, certainly the traditional view in the West, like I have some Blackstones commentaries back here right behind me. You know the English legal scholar, legal scholar. Traditionally in the West our laws have been not just do we see what Scripture says, but actually Scripture is the foundation even for our laws. We have the common law that we get, even before this country was founded, from England. And where did England get the common law Straight out of Scripture, just starting with scripture and kind of saying, all right now, what are the applications of that? And that's the kind of legal system that the West and even this country has been built on.

Luke Allen:

Hi, friends, I wanted to take a quick minute to tell you that the Bible study that goes along with our newest book here at the Disciple Nations Alliance 10 Words to Heal Our Broken World Restoring the True Meanings of Our Most Important Words, by Scott Allen, is finally out. Guys, this 10-week Bible study is a perfect resource for any of us who wants to deepen our understanding in each of these 10 culture-forming words. This study will force you to open your Bible and see the true meanings of these 10 biblical words, words like truth, human sex, marriage, freedom, authority, justice, faith, beauty and love.

Luke Allen:

If you're wondering why defining words is so important, just keep listening to today's episode on the horrors of abortion and think about how the words that God originally defined for us in his word, for example, marriage, sex, justice, love and human or human rights, have been so drastically redefined in our culture today that they are being used to support abortion and the ending of the beautiful gift of human life.

Luke Allen:

If Christians don't know how to define these words according to God and his word, then who's going to defend them against being redefined as we see today? So again, the Bible study for 10 words to heal our broken world, a 10 week course is out now and is available on Amazon, so you can grab your copy today by just tapping on the link in the show notes. This study is great for you to take on your own, at your own pace, or with a church Bible study or a small group or any such group that you may be a part of. So, again, we hope this is a helpful resource for you, and it is the 10-week Bible study course that goes along with 10 words to heal our broken world.

Scott Allen:

Well, listen, we wanna get Bradley into the work that you're doing with the abortion abolitionist movement and your work as the president of the Foundation tolife. Or just the state of abortion, let's say, in the United States post-Dobbs, you know what are you seeing when you look out across the landscape, you know. I think, for a lot of Christians. It's been a little bit confusing and maybe not quite what we expected. So what's your take on that?

Bradley Pierce:

Yeah, well, obviously we had the road decision in 1973, originally in this country, and that was kind of the watershed moment on the issue of abortion, where the Supreme Court said states cannot regulate abortion within the first trimester in any way as the court later went on to say to create any undue burden to a woman's right to an abortion. And so we had that for 49 years until the Dobbs case overruled Roe versus Wade and returned it back, as the Dobbs case said to the people and the people's representatives, so to the states or Congress, if Congress chooses to weigh in on the issue. So that happened. That was a fight that went on for a long time and a lot of people thought, hey, once we do that, then that's victory, we've won, this issue is done. The abolitionists we were saying, um, or, since I got involved with this 2016, and then others, even even well before me, you know we were saying, well, you know, roe versus wade is not the law of the land, it's not, it's unconstitutional, it violates constitution. So states shouldn't have been following it even in the first place. But certainly we're glad that dobbs now has removed that as an excuse.

Bradley Pierce:

And then, because of Dobbs, there were a lot of states that had trigger bills in place, meaning that the trigger bills were if a case like Dobbs came down and overruled Roe, then these bills would go into effect and ban abortion in that state. Bills would go into effect and ban abortion in that state. So there are now 14 states that have laws banning you know, purporting to ban abortion from conception in those states. Unfortunately, kind of the state of abortion today in this country is that it's higher. The abortion numbers are higher than we've seen in at least 10 years, probably even longer than that. And even in these 14 states that have supposedly banned abortion, the numbers of babies from those states being aborted is higher than it was even, you know, before Dobbs. And so that's happening from a couple different ways. One is abortion travel people in those states traveling to other states, which you know the state's ability to regulate or prohibit that is somewhat limited, or at least the courts you know would probably say that it is. But then, even without that, there's actually abortions happening still in those states in extremely high numbers.

Bradley Pierce:

And those abortions that are happening are self-induced abortions, where the mothers are ordering pills online, either through telehealth or through other online providers, getting the pills delivered to their home in these states with bans, and then taking the pills in the states, and that's not illegal. Every single one of these trigger bills or human life protection acts that bans abortion from conception. They apply to the abortion clinics, like Planned Parenthood, but they explicitly say every single one of them and every single ban on abortion pills and every single heartbeat bill. They all say the same thing and that is that this does not apply to the mother of the unborn child, and so moms can order the pills because there's this explicit, basically license written into the law for them. They can order the pills, they can possess the pills, they can take the pills and induce their own abortions, and that's completely legal, not just by silence in the law, but by expressly specific immunity given to the mothers to do that in the states. And so, for example, in states like Texas there's last hard data we've seen on this was at least 20,000. We've seen more recent data that shows it's 28,000 or 29,000 abortions like that happening on Texas soil, again completely legal under the pro-life bills, and it's like that in all 14 of these states. And so we still have abortion is legal in all 50 states today, kind of.

Bradley Pierce:

If you're comparing this issue, you know, to the issue of slavery as abolitionists. We, you know that kind of you kind of evokes that we're not post-Civil War right. Slavery hasn't been abolished, abortion hasn't been abolished. We're not even in 1850, where you had a lot of states that had abolished it, but not all. We're actually in 1750, where slavery is legal in every single state, abortion is legal in every single state. Every single baby in this country can be legally aborted by his or her mother in every single state in America today. And so we've got a long ways to go.

Scott Allen:

Wow, that's really sobering. I mean I've never heard it put that way, because you hear about these states. What was the number that have? You know the trigger, you know warnings that went into effect and abolished quote-unquote, abolished abortion. How many did you say it was now?

Bradley Pierce:

There's 14.

Scott Allen:

Yeah, I've always, you know, I've never heard it put the way you have, which is abortion is completely legal in those states because of pills that women can order online and take. Has there been any effort on the part of those states, or any state, to get at that issue?

Bradley Pierce:

Well, there's been. Most of those states have passed some kind of law that restricts the manufacturing and distribution of pills. So you know, cvs, walgreens, they can't carry the pill in those states. But again, even that law also says this doesn't apply to the mother, and so that means that it's perfectly legal for her to order it and get it shipped in from another state and then to take it.

Scott Allen:

And most of these are ordered online, I would imagine, right.

Bradley Pierce:

Yeah, it's kind of like the, you know, with COVID everybody's. You know, a lot of people were already ordering everything online, but now almost everybody did, and so that's actually in some ways, dobbs has actually made abortion, and I think this is why we're seeing the numbers actually increase nationwide, because you think, wait, it's a little bit, it's harder, at least in these 14 states, to get an abortion. So why are numbers overall going up? It's because the Planned Parenthoods and all that has been shut down. It's pushed the market to online, basically like the amazoncom of abortions, and so now it's made that way, way cheaper, way, way easier, and so that's, I believe, why abortions overall are higher than ever, because it's cheaper and easier than ever before to get an abortion in all 50 states.

Scott Allen:

So sobering, it's just heartbreaking, yeah, wow. Well, I mean I want to hear a little bit more about what you're doing, you know, to respond to that, what your organization is doing and what this movement is doing. Dwight and Luke, before we jump to that, anything about just the state of kind of the country today, post-dobbs, that you were wanting to kind of explore.

Luke Allen:

This is a bit of a big question, but I've been curious to hear some of the arguments made for the 14th Amendment on how that applies to abortion in this country. As far as I can tell, the 14th Amendment protects every living American. Is that the way? I just want to hear that broken down. It seems simple to me, and yet this argument still goes on, case after case.

Bradley Pierce:

Yeah, so actually in the Dobbs case, in the brief that we submitted there, we argued that the court should overturn Roe v Wade. That was one of our arguments and they did do that and many, many others were arguing for that. But our additional argument was that not only should you overturn Roe v Wade, but you should find that a pre-born child, a fetus, as the court would say, that a fetus is a person under the 14th Amendment. Because the 14th Amendment says no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. What laws are we talking about? We're at least talking about laws protecting life, liberty and property, mentioned just above in the 14th Amendment. So all laws protecting life should protect the lives of all persons without discrimination and equal protection. So that's what the 14th Amendment requires. Now the federal courts have never said that the person includes a preborn child. That's our argument that they should say, that they should agree with that.

Bradley Pierce:

We think both obviously biblically, but even scientifically and even historically and legally, that's how the drafters of the 14th Amendment would have considered them and those who ratified it, and so we believe that they are persons under the 14th Amendment, and so that would mean that if the 14th Amendment applied, which we believe it does, then no state can have abortion. And in fact, not only can no state have abortions, but every state must provide equal protection of the laws. State must provide equal protection of the laws. And what would that look like on paper? Is that every state homicide. You know, every state already has laws against homicides, already illegal to murder people in every single state. So every state law that prohibited murder would also have to prohibit the murder of people before they were born. That's what equal protection would be.

Dwight Vogt:

My question is I mean, we had the Dobbs Law, we had it overturned, but the abortion pill was always in the background. It seems like for a number of years now, but it almost seems like it was a surprise. It's like, oh my goodness, there's this abortion bill, things have changed.

Bradley Pierce:

Was it a surprise to your foundation or why is there a sense of wow, we never expected this to happen? Now, Well, I don't know exactly. I think the pro-life lobbying organizations were really focused on Roe and that's where all the attention was, and so you know, so all the people who follow them that's where the attention was. But yeah, even before Dobbs, over 60% of abortions were pill abortions. Now they were pills, though, that the pregnant mom would go pick up at the abortion clinics. You know, ordering online was a very, very small number of that going on. Pregnant mom would go pick up at the abortion clinics. Ordering online was a very, very small number of that going on, but now Dobbs really pushed the market in that direction. So, yeah, definitely the majority of abortions even before Dobbs were pills, but they were pills that you still had to go to a clinic to get.

Scott Allen:

Yeah, yeah, bradley, I remember about 10 years ago maybe I'm trying to think it was before Dobbs but there was a sense on the pro-life side that we were making headway, not just legally but more kind of culturally, and I think there was even some data to back that up that millennials were more pro-life than previous generations, and there was a lot. You know, there were several films that came out that were explicitly pro-life and you know, I felt a sense of kind of optimism, like maybe the culture's shifting, because ultimately you want people, you know, going back to the slavery issue, you want people, all Americans, to be revolted by the very idea like I can't believe we ever allowed the legalization of slavery and the ownership of other human beings for personal profit or whatever it was. And you know, nobody would even think about that morally today or make a case to defend that. You know, and that's where you know you want to be on this issue as well I can't believe we ever did that. You know, this horrible injustice to all of these people.

Scott Allen:

And I felt like, you know, there was a sense that we were making some headway on the pro-life side, in the culture, on attitudes, on that. And then, after Dobbs, it seems like you know, it almost seems like, well, we were wrong. You know, the culture is still really not, you know, not pro-life. Any thoughts on that or comments on that?

Bradley Pierce:

Yeah, I know the data that you're talking about showing that the millennials were more and even Gen Z maybe shifting more pro-life. I mean, part of it is, you know, it's one thing to say it. You know, I think one of the issues was that before Dobbs, people really didn't have to have a lot of an opinion about the subject. They weren't forced to have an opinion because, ultimately, what does my opinion matter? The Supreme Court has already decided anyway, you know. So my opinion is not really worth anything.

Bradley Pierce:

Now people are like, wow, I may actually have a vote If my state is a state that has ballot initiatives, like many of them do, or the people I vote for may actually, they'll actually decide this issue, and so I think a lot of people have kind of been forced to figure out where they are, you know. That said, I think it still remains to be seen really, where are people, because there's, I think, a lot of pro-life people have gone to sleep thinking that, oh, the job's already been done. You know, roe versus Wade, that's where I've, that was our effort and so are those people actually turning out and acting and voting and donating? You know, the way that they, that they were? I don't think so.

Bradley Pierce:

I mean it's not from the, not from my experience. I think a lot of them have gone to sleep moved on to other issues. There's a lot of people that even like. Well, yes, I care about that issue, but let's focus on these other issues first. And whereas the opposite you know, for the pro-abortion side, they've been awake, very energized, yeah, Very energized, more than ever.

Scott Allen:

Yeah, I think that you're putting your finger on it. I think that it was a huge wake-up call to the other side and you know, everything was framed around roe v wade, you know, you're right. It seems like that was the framing thing for this issue for so long and I think on our, our side, the pro-life side, it was like, oh, job done, and then, yeah, it's going to lead to some complacency, um, which I think has happened, and then the other side is highly energized. So it seems that, anyways, that's my observation, any reaction to that or thoughts on your part, because that that seems to be, I mean side is highly energized. So it seems that, anyways, that's my observation, any reaction to that or thoughts on your part, because that seems to be.

Bradley Pierce:

I mean time will tell you know where things actually are once they shake out but at least for the moment. The pro-abortion side is way more energized.

Scott Allen:

Wow, and so we have a lot of work to do. If we're back on the, you know, in the 1700s, as opposed to, as you know, to your analogy with slavery, we have a lot of work to do. Tell us about the work you're doing, then, and the work of the foundation and your particular approach. How do you see us needing to move forward, the best way to move forward on this?

Bradley Pierce:

Yeah, well, and that's why we created the documentary, the docuseries, Abortion Free and, you know, because we do think a lot of people are complacent and gone to sleep because they're not aware of what's going on, because, again, even that phrase, abortion free is something that many, many pro-life organizations are saying, that these 14 states are abortion free, and I think that's even further putting people to sleep and lulling them into complacency. So that's why we created that, to let people know hey, here's what's really going on and it's not time to go to sleep at all, and really so.

Bradley Pierce:

At the Foundation to Abolish Abortion, we're a nonprofit organization seeking to promote equal protection for loving our pre-born neighbors in the way that we would want to be. Love them how we would want to be love them as ourselves, as Jesus says, and to do that from a policy perspective. As an attorney, that's kind of our focus at our organization and as abolitionists, our approach to this issue is different in many ways from the pro-life approach, although we are pro-life and it says that we are for life. Of course we prefer the term abolitionist because it says here's what we want to do about it. Here's what we think needs to be done. It needs to be abolished. It needs to be made illegal. It needs to be criminalized the same way that slavery was. That's how. And again, how do we do that? By equal protection, right, by protecting their lives with the same laws protecting ours. That's really that simple. So kind of the three of the. You know what we mean by abolition, or three marks of abolitionists today on this abortion issue. First of all is that we're Christian. We believe that this is a work of the church, that this is how God works through his church and through us, calling for reforms for true justice. This is a way that we love our neighbor as ourselves is by calling for them to be protected by the same laws protecting ours. And so how do we do that?

Bradley Pierce:

Why is abortion wrong? Is it wrong because Bradley or Luke or Dwight or Scott say it's wrong? It can't be that right. That can't be the reason. Who are we to tell, as they would put it, to tell women what to do with their own bodies? Right, we don't have the right to do that. And who is the? You know, whenever we say, well, it's science or it's human rights, well, I mean, again, you're just coming down to humanism. You know, the only person who can tell someone that is God. And so we have to say abortion is wrong, yes, human rights, science, all that, but it's ultimately wrong because God says it's wrong. That's what we have to come back to. When we do that, then we can speak with moral authority, because we can speak with his authority, and that's what we have to say. And then, yes, science, and everything as well, but ultimately it's because he says and he's God, and so we have to do what he says and what does he say we should do about it? He says it's murder. We should criminalize it as murder. And so that's what we should do. And then, okay, what does that look like?

Bradley Pierce:

Well, equal protection, right, god says that you shall not do partiality in judgment. You shall not have partiality in judgment, meaning that we don't discriminate against someone on judging their case just because of their identity. We don't say, oh well, you're black and you're white, so I'm going to go with this person. Or you're male or you're female, or you're strong and weak, and rich or poor, or politically powerful or not, or, in this case, born or unborn, or the father or the mother. Right, god says he hates partiality and judgment, repeatedly throughout Scripture, and we're not to do that. And so that's what the Constitution calls equal protection of the laws. Right, the laws should not apply partiality and judgment should not require partiality and judgment. Right, judges and juries should, yes, hear each case on a case-by-case basis and judge, you know, figure out what all the facts are, and then apply the law of the facts. But not, you know, we shouldn't write bills and just say, all right, everyone, every woman, you know, gets an immunity on this issue. That's, you know, that's showing partiality just because it's the mother.

Scott Allen:

Is that the central issue that divides you from maybe more traditional pro-life organizations Is the issue of what happens to a woman who chooses abortion.

Bradley Pierce:

I would say on the policy side, that is, you know, that's where you see the dividing line, as far as with the laws that are written. The pro-life lobby, every one of the laws that they write, pretty much says that creates. You know, it singles out the mother for immunity, whereas the laws that we write we don't single anybody out. We say that, as we put it, murdering anyone should be illegal for everyone. So we don't believe in singling people out for special murder privileges or a license to kill. We believe that, no, everyone should be prohibited and everyone should be protected.

Bradley Pierce:

One more kind of distinction, of abolitionists as well, is on the issue of what many would call incrementalism. I'm not a huge fan of the term because, again, everything is an increment. Getting from point A to point B, there's always steps along the way. So it's not that I'm opposed to increments, but we're opposed to increments that show partiality, which God forbids, or increments that refuse to do what God commands, which is abolishing it as murder. Instead, many of the increments are trying to regulate, like healthcare, the who, what, when, where, why and how of abortion, which God never tells us to do. He doesn't tell us to do that, he tells us, you know, criminalize it, and so that's what we think we should do. So that's why the abolitionists do not support those kind of increments that just regulate the circumstances instead of abolishing it.

Scott Allen:

Do you think this is an issue, bradley, about tactics? In other words, do you think that the basic goals that you put forward in terms of upholding the 14th Amendment, rights of all Americans, including the unborn, treating people equally before the law, without partiality, are those broadly the same goals that we all share on the pro-life side, or is there a difference at kind of what we're aiming for? You know, not just the— I can see the argument here for tactics like well, we're going to take an incrementalist approach or we're going to—whatever you know there's—I can see the argument, but is there—are we aiming at the same thing? Cause I've always thought we kind of were. Like the way you. You describe it to me goes yep, that's what, what it means to be pro life.

Bradley Pierce:

Right, and I think that's what you know. Your average pro life person does think that it's like, well, yeah, I agree with that. Yeah, we may disagree on the incremental thing, but I mean, we all agree with equal protection, right? And I wish I could say the answer is yes. Actually, we had a bill that we had drafted that was introduced in 2022 in Louisiana, that ultimately, 77 major pro-life organizations signed a letter opposing and sent that not just to the Louisiana legislature hours before the House vote, but also to all legislators across the country saying that they opposed equal protection or, as they put it, opposed criminalizing the mother. Now, again, we would say we're not criminalizing the mother, we're just saying you, saying it applies equally to everybody, they're the ones that are singling her out for immunity and, again, we're not criminalizing the mother, we're criminalizing murder, no matter who commits it. They're criminalizing an act, and so those organizations did that. Even just recently, there was a resolution in North Dakota the Republican Party for equal protection Again, this is just like, basically like their, you know, plank of the party platform, kind of thing, or resolution to add to the platform in North Dakota and multiple major pro-life organizations National Ride to Life Students for a Life Action. Susan B Anthony.

Bradley Pierce:

Again, some of the biggest players in the pro-life lobby submitted a letter opposing that, again, opposing it because they say it criminalizes the mother Again, not because we're singling out the mother, but because they've singled out the mother in their legislation for immunity. And all we're saying is no one should get immunity. Every case should be considered on a case-by-case basis. That's what we're saying. So they oppose that. And so it's not just hey, we all want equal protection, right, we just differ about how we get there. Equal protection, right, we just differ about how we get there. No, actually, most of the pro-life lobby actually are not just neutral on it, they actually oppose equal protection.

Scott Allen:

Wow, okay, yeah, that's news to me, I guess, because I can definitely see where you can have debates on tactics and, you know, especially on this issue of do we criminalize abortion for the woman who's had it? You know, or maybe that's not the right way of saying it, but yeah, I can see that as being a real point of discussion or debate. But the idea itself that this is a human being and deserves equal treatment under law it's surprising, dwight Luke. I just want you guys to feel free to jump in here to this as well.

Dwight Vogt:

Yeah, I'm going to push back. I'm thinking, well, they do agree with you, bradley. They just have different tactics and they know that, living in a pluralistic society, nobody would listen. You know, I mean the country doesn't believe in what you're saying. I mean, so what hope do you have would be my pushback, you know. So, yeah, I mean we as Christians, but we know that we can't get there because we live in a pluralistic society. That almost voted in the most radical well, not almost, but the opponent was a radical abortion supporter in the last election. So I mean we, there's so far to go. What's wrong with an incremental approach?

Bradley Pierce:

Well, and again, it's not just the incremental, it's they're actually opposing. It's like you know. They're not just like all right, you abolitionists, y'all do the equal protection thing, we're going to do the regulating. You know who, what, when, where, why and how. 15 weeks, 20 weeks, you've got to have surgical center standards, et cetera, kind of thing that they've been doing. They're not just like hey, you guys do that, we'll do this. You know there's been dozens of equal protection bills filed that we've been involved in, many that we haven't, around the country and in every single Republican state which is, you know, the vast majority or almost all those bills have been in Republican controlled states. The pro-life lobby there has come out in opposition to those. Again, not just like all right, you guys pursue your strategy, we're going to pursue ours. It's actual opposition.

Scott Allen:

And is that because sorry to cut you off, bradley, but is that because they know if we do that, that's going to do this thing that we just we don't want, you know, which is potentially putting, you know, women who've had abortions into prison?

Bradley Pierce:

Well, and no one's talking about putting women who's had abortions right, talking about in the past into prison, right? No one is advocating for that. That would be called ex post facto law or retroactive law, and no one is advocating for that in any way. You know, the US Constitution prohibits that. Every state constitution prohibits that. Our bills prohibit that that we write.

Bradley Pierce:

What we're talking about is putting a law in place that you know, from the moment the law becomes effective, then all right, it applies to everybody. And really there's three purposes of that, you know, just like any other criminal law, you know. First of all, the law is a tutor, as Scripture puts it right. It has a didactic purpose that it teaches people hey, here's when life begins, here's the value we're putting upon life. It's kind of one of those. Does law reflect culture? Does culture reflect law? Well, both right, they both impact the other, and so this is a way like, hey, as a society, we're saying we're teaching here's when life begins, here's the value of it, the same value as everybody else. And you know, then that will hopefully change some people's minds on the subject, just like abolishing slavery did over time. Then, if people don't ultimately agree with that, though. That's why the law then has penalties right to restrain people from committing those crimes because of the fear of the penalty, and in this case the penalty also reflects the value or the heinousness of the crime.

Scott Allen:

And then finally go ahead. Well, just hypothetically, if a state like North Dakota passed this kind of law and made you know, treated the unborn just like anyone else you know, and if you take their life you're guilty, you know, potentially, of murder and the penalties that go along with that, I mean, wouldn't it be possible or that somebody would say I'm going to violate that law and you know I mean you know and potentially go to you know face a consequence of prison, you know, just like if they killed somebody outside the womb right.

Bradley Pierce:

Exactly, yeah, exactly. Just like if a mother or a father were to take the life of their one-year-old or two-year-old right?

Scott Allen:

It's not that automatically, you know they go to prison or capital punishment, but they're liable for violating the law, right?

Bradley Pierce:

Yeah, but again that's what the justice system is there to figure out.

Scott Allen:

Law enforcement and— you would expect it to happen in that way in some ways.

Bradley Pierce:

We have all of that to figure out with due process beyond reasonable doubt, presuming that they're innocent appellate courts, and all that to make sure the law is followed, the jury decides, you know, and all of that to figure out what is actual justice in each case.

Scott Allen:

Yeah, so, but isn't back to the principle. So you said the pro-life movements aren't with us on principle here. Isn't that kind of the reason that we just you know that can't be a possibility? Is that what they're saying?

Bradley Pierce:

You know, we Correct yeah. Yeah, yeah, and their argument is that? Well, all women are victims. All women are victims of abortion and therefore they should not be held civilly or criminally liable for the abortion. It's not their fault.

Scott Allen:

Yeah, yeah. Make the best case you can on why that's wrong. Thinking and the approach that you're taking would actually move us further towards a place where abortion, you know, goes the way of slavery in our country.

Bradley Pierce:

Yeah.

Bradley Pierce:

So you know, when we say that a woman is a victim of, or when they say a woman's a victim of an abortion, there are several reasons. There are several kind of rationales that they argue for that. One is that, well, women have been indoctrinated in this for decades now and taught to believe that it's a clump of cells and things like that. So that's one, and so therefore they're victims. Well, there are two answers to that. Number one is that the quickest way to un-indoctrinate we had this with slavery as well, right, everybody had been indoctrinated that the black men and women were subhuman and that they could be enslaved. It's like, well, how to un-indoctrinate them? Make it illegal, abolish it, make it illegal. That's the fastest way and most powerful way to do that. And again, like I said, we're not talking about going backwards, we're talking about from the moment the bill becomes effective, and so that's very quickly going to un-indoctrinate them. And if they really do believe that it's a clump of cells, that's something that would be considered by the prosecutor, grand jury, jury, judges along the way, because that's called mistake of fact, right? If you're oh, I didn't know what I was doing, right, that could be considered as a defense. You know as well.

Bradley Pierce:

The other thing is that you know it's, one of the original arguments for saying women shouldn't be prosecuted is that you have to have corroborating evidence. If she's testifying against an abortion issue, you have to have corroborating evidence. Anyways, none of that's really applicable anymore. Now. We have way better forensic technology and ultrasounds and things like that to prove crimes. And so really, the rationale you know, saying women are indoctrinated is actually in favor of equal protection, because, okay, yeah, many of them have been lied to. Then let's stop lying to them, let's. You know even the pro-life bills that say it's okay if the mom does it, wait, that's just further indoctrinating them and telling them that it's okay. Why don't we stop doing that? In fact, maybe the pro-life movement is even guilty of contributing to that indoctrination, and so that's one of the reasons.

Bradley Pierce:

Also, many of them say well, many women are coerced into an abortion, right. That's why, again, they kind of extend to say all women are victims. But they say many women are coerced. Well, the actual numbers. There's duress, right, which is someone's forced to do something, right, someone puts a gun to their head, threatens them. That's a very, very, very small percentage of women.

Bradley Pierce:

Then you have those that are coerced, meaning that someone you know says, well, I'm going to break up with you or I'm going to, you know, kick you out of the house or cut you off financially, things like that. You know. Self-reporting women report it's under 10% of cases, but you know, even so, what equal protection would actually do is that because it's currently legal for the mother, then it's actually. You cannot go after the person who coerces them as long as they're not actually threatening their life or limb. But the person who says, well, I'm going to break up with you or I'm going to leave you if you don't get an abortion.

Bradley Pierce:

If it were murder for the mother, right, in other words, if it were murder for everyone, then you could go after that person for pressuring her, for trying to coerce her into that, because they would be soliciting a murder, right, or they would be aiding and abetting a murder. But because it's not murder for her, then it's not illegal for the person who's pressuring her into it as well. So that's why eco-protection is not just the best thing for the child, but it's also the best thing for the mother as well, to prevent that coercion. So, anyways, those are the main arguments the pro-life movement argues for why we should treat all women as victims and you know, I don't think they hold water and I think that that's not what God says.

Scott Allen:

We should not have partiality in judgment and ultimately, you know, we should have equal protection of the laws. Yeah, Well, listen I. What are you?

Dwight Vogt:

seeing. Are you going forward or are we going backwards in terms of your work?

Bradley Pierce:

You know we're going forward, we are making progress. I'm not expecting a state to abolish it tomorrow, but just like the abolition of slavery was a you know, for example, william Wilberforce in England to abolish the slave trade took 19 years, 19 years of introducing the bill again and again, and again and again, and then slavery and the colonies beyond that even. And so I'm not expecting it to happen overnight, but I think that this is what the church should be calling for, because this is what God calls for. This is what we should be advocating for, because that's what he says.

Dwight Vogt:

And what are you personally dealing with? I mean, Wilberforce got pushback.

Bradley Pierce:

Right. Well, we're getting pushback, like I said, from, certainly again, not just the pro-abortion side, but the pro-life establishment as well. All of the bills, the dozens of bills that we've been involved with, have all, like I said, been killed in those states by pro-life politicians and pro-life organizations, and so that's a lot of the pushback.

Scott Allen:

Is that kind of your focus right now is kind of in the church, so to speak, or within the pro-life movement to try to build greater numbers and support for your position?

Bradley Pierce:

Yes. So certainly culturally, you know, seeking to awaken the church and pastors and Christians, you know, to love their neighbor as themselves. And you know, and not just to use a parable of Good Samaritans, not just be like a Goodaritans, not just be like the priest and Levite who walk by, not that I don't want to put words in their mouth, but basically like, well, I'm not the one who beat up this man and left him for dead on the side of the road, so I'm holy right, I'm not aborting my children, so I'm okay. It's like no, no, no, there's someone there who needs us.

Bradley Pierce:

And in this case, our laws actually say it's legal to beat the man up and leave him dead on the side of the, leave him dying on the side of the road. So we should both reach out to that man, to minister to him directly, like pregnancy help centers and many other, you know churches and other places do, and that's wonderful. But we also have to make it illegal to do that right. It should be illegal to do that. That's how we love our neighbor as ourself, and so that's what we're seeking to do is to awaken Christians, awaken pro-lifers, to what's really going on, what God says to do about it and you know I hate to seem simplistic, but I think we are called to have faith like children, and I think that we should pursue doing God's will, god's ways, and then we trust Him with the results and have faith that he's going to do good work through it.

Scott Allen:

Well, I think you know, the great virtue of your position, bradley, is that it's completely consistent. You know, this is a human life, a human life created by God from the moment of conception, and it deserves every protection that any human life does. And then, from that basic, foundational point, you go forward. Right, you be every, you know, and so there's a lot, a great deal of clarity with with what your position is. But then I do think there's, you know there's still, I think, some room for some discussion on um. You know what is the best way to to achieve that end in the culture where, where that becomes the position that everyone believes in, or the vast majority, let's say, believe that position as well. Yeah, and you know it is a work not just of law, for sure. It's probably more fundamentally a work of just changing people's hearts and minds.

Bradley Pierce:

You know, on an issue here, Well, and the bills are, and we expect more bills to be filed bills of equal protection to be filed this year than ever. So we're grateful for that. So we do see a lot of movement forward. Well, that's good, but the bills are also a catalyst right for those conversations to awaken people, yes, and so that's a big help. So again, that's kind of the seeking to impact the culture and the law. Those go hand in hand.

Dwight Vogt:

What would you say to my pastor, who's attracting all kinds of people into our church that you know pro-abortion. Some have had abortions, some are adamant against it. What would you say to him?

Bradley Pierce:

I would say that he needs to preach what the Bible says about it. I would say that he needs to preach what the Bible says about it, and then he needs to deal with. If people have done that, here's the awesome thing. Hey, I've committed sins against God, we've all committed sins against God, and there's mercy. There's mercy there. So, if people have committed abortions, the answer isn't hiding about it or lying about it or pretending that it's something that it's not. It's confessing it, confessing what it is and then repenting of it, and so I think that's what pastors need to do with members who have abortions in their past and then members who are currently supporting abortion. That's something that I think needs to be rebuked from the pulpit. And privately. I'm not saying calling people out personally from the pulpit, but I'm saying that position, that that's anti-biblical, that's the opposite of what God says, and so I think that's how pastors need to deal with it.

Luke Allen:

Yeah, just the pill has introduced a whole different complexity into this discussion, which I don't know if what you were saying the incrementalists have grasped yet, and someone who says, like a heartbeat bill is better than nothing, that makes sense. But that's talking about people that go in for the procedure of, at a certain amount of weeks, getting an abortion. But with the pill on the market it's really a free fall. At this point I had a friend who hopped online, grabbed one, shipped to her door, showed up. Obviously she's a Christian, she didn't want it, she just was curious how easy it was to get it. Very easy, no-transcript.

Luke Allen:

It's hard because I don't want to be someone who says, well, those don't help. Maybe, you know, maybe that does stop some people. I think it does, probably. I've seen stats that say it does. I'm not sure if those are exactly stats that you would agree with or where they're coming from, but for example, after Dobbs I believe I saw a number that says so many thousand kids were saved because of the Dobbs decision. But I don't know if that's exactly including statistics of at-home abortions. So it gets messy and it's just. It's a whole new look at this argument that I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around, but I think it's really good we're having this discussion and a lot more Christians need to be having it.

Bradley Pierce:

Yeah, I have seen some numbers early on that showed certain thousand numbers that were supposedly saved. It's hard to nail down for sure. I do think that there was probably a dip. You know after Dobbs that a lot of people didn't, from what I've the numbers that I've seen to show that there probably was a dip after Dobbs, you know, people didn't know what they could do or were figuring things out.

Bradley Pierce:

But again, I think the numbers that we're seeing now make it pretty obvious that that's been eliminated. You know numbers now overall higher and so, yes, maybe there were some babies saved, hopefully there were some babies saved. Praise God if there were some babies saved in that time. But I think some of the you know one of the problems with, you know, passing these bills of partiality that may save some, you know, or at least temporarily save some. In the long run, among other issues, they give people a false sense of victory and so now all those other children are being ignored because everybody thinks the job's done or everybody thinks that, oh, there's only a very, very little left to do, and so it ends up delaying the actual abolition of abortion and ultimately, I believe that, you know, makes the ultimate numbers way, way higher than if we had just stuck with, you know, the principle yeah is there, any country in the world that you're aware of that's abolished abortion Not?

Bradley Pierce:

that I'm aware of Not that you're aware of.

Scott Allen:

Yeah, I was kind of curious about that.

Bradley Pierce:

So we've got a lot of work to do yeah right?

Scott Allen:

Well, Dwight and Luke may have your permission to ask a couple of personal questions here.

Luke Allen:

Well, to kind of wrap up my thinking, here, you guys have already alluded to this, but here at the DNA we talk about worldview, a lot biblical worldview, how that applies to culture, and then from that point, you know, politics is upstream from culture, downstream from culture sorry, we say that all the time and it starts with the paradigm, then the principle and then the policy, and then the time. Um, and it starts with the, the paradigm, then the principle and then the policy and then the practice. That's the way things usually get worked out into society. Um, and I would just encourage uh, christians who get discouraged when they hear that like wow, we have a long ways to go in culture. Um, there's a lot of Christians in this country, at least, uh, reported Christians. Um, and if we can start, as Christians inside of churches, really nailing down from a principled standpoint why we believe, what we believe about human life, what we believe about sexuality, if we can lock that in in the churches, which we are far from that that'll have a huge swing in our culture.

Luke Allen:

We're talking hundreds of thousands of people. I know for myself a few years ago I'm a Christian, I'm pro-life, right. We like saying that it's kind of like Christian virtue signaling oh, I'm pro-life, I'm a good Christian. But we don't exactly know what that means and I didn't have a great understanding of what that meant. And when people really pushed me on it, you know, when they got into debates about exceptions and stuff like that, I didn't have much of a stance because I hadn't thought about it enough. So really locking that in inside of our churches, I think is a great first step and there's a lot of progress we can make in that category.

Scott Allen:

Anyways, over to you Dad. Yeah, well, I mean, isn't it? Bradley? On the incremental, let's say you know we can't get a law in a state that makes abortion illegal and, you know, treats the unborn in every respect, just like you know anyone else, and you know so. But we could get, you know, some kind of a law that you know gets us I don't want to say partway there, because that's you know, but yeah, criminalizes after a certain number of weeks, or you know, whatever it is. Would you be, you know? Would you say, well, let's take that win and then we'll move on, Because you know, we're clear where we want to go, but we'll take that win. Or would you say, no, that's not, that's not a, you know that's not going to help us. Uh, you know, I'm not sure if I'm being very clear here, but uh, yeah, I wouldn't say it's a win.

Bradley Pierce:

I mean, first of all, um, this is what we've been doing for 52 years and it's not having the effect that we want it to have, is it? Secondly, you know, for a bill like that that says, well, let's do it after a certain date, now we're doing something that God explicitly forbids, right? God explicitly forbids partiality, and what he means by it, or what he says. The Hebrew word for partiality when God says that, is to regard faces, right, To judge based upon the face of the person instead of the merits of the case. And so any bill that says, well, I need to know how old this person is, or I need to know, you know, is this the mom or is this the dad, Any bill that says those things in the actual, you know that that's the bill.

Bradley Pierce:

You have to judge based upon those factors. That is requiring something that God explicitly forbids, and I don't think we can do that. I don't believe we can do that, and that's why, again, can we consider factors in an individual case? Those are things that can be considered. Obviously, the jury will consider well, the dad, he knew more than the mom, or what have you. We can consider intent. We can consider intent, we can consider the actions. But when we write laws that say we judge explicitly on the face of the parties, God says you cannot do that.

Scott Allen:

Let me, you know, in this last election there was a lot of pro-life friends and they'll say and I agree with them, this is my issue, this is the issue that I more than any other issue, this is what I vote on. And they looked at the candidates. Neither of them were pro-life, especially as you're describing here, and so they would say I can't vote for either. You know, in other words, I can't vote for a candidate that doesn't have, you know, this kind of pure view. You know, biblical let's just say biblical view, right, so I just can't vote. What advice would you give to those people? Or what's your take on that? You know, my pastor said hey, listen, you're not going to find many of those people, hardly any you vote for. You know who's got the most pro-life kind of position? In this case, it would have been Donald Trump over Kamala Harris, so encouraging people to vote for Donald Trump. You know how would you respond?

Bradley Pierce:

Yeah, you know I mean issues of voting. That's a whole other discussion. Obviously, when we're voting for someone, we're voting for a person and nobody. You know, while we can have a bill that can be perfect in a sense that it can correctly address a particular issue, when we're voting for a person, you know they're not perfect on anything and they may be great on this issue and not great on this issue, and so you know it's hard to you know the same standards really don't apply.

Bradley Pierce:

I think whenever we're voting for a person, that said, I think that there are standards. I think that there are biblical standards that we can apply to how we vote and that we should apply, and that certainly I applied when I voted, but that's a whole different discussion. So, you know, I think someone's position on a particular issue. You know, I think ultimately we vote on character and I think that's what Scripture says we should do and their position can reflect that character, but ultimately we vote on character.

Scott Allen:

But the idea that unless they uphold kind of a purist position on abortion, we should not vote for them. You wouldn't necessarily agree with that.

Bradley Pierce:

I don't necessarily agree with that I mean. I would love to only vote for people who agree with me on this issue, but I don't agree that that's a requirement for my vote, gotcha.

Scott Allen:

I live in, you know, the state of Oregon, luke does too. You know we feel called to be here, recently moved from Arizona and you know personally it's very challenging. On this issue, I feel my conscience often is violated. You is violated because we're paying taxes into a state that is very proudly one of the most pro-abortion in the country. You can travel here and get abortions from states that are limited and it's paid for by taxpayers like myself included. I hate even to say that. It just, you know, it's so wrong, it's just evil. What advice do you have for Christians like myself in places like this that are, you know, far, kind of at the opposite end of the spectrum, from a state like Texas, maybe where you're at there, Bradley, I know some people just say leave and I suppose that's one option, but what's your thoughts on that?

Bradley Pierce:

Yeah, obviously leaving is an option, but also being salt and light where you are is also a valid option. There's lots of considerations for either of those. But I think if you're there, then be salt and light there, and the one opportunity that you have there that we don't really have in places like Texas is that you do still have abortion clinics that are operating there. You do know where people are going for many of the abortions that are going on, and there is at least a place that you can go and offer them one last, you know, one last chance, one last cry for mercy. You have to have mercy on their child. There's a place you can go to do that that we can't do that in Texas.

Bradley Pierce:

You know in Texas they're all happy. They're ordering them and doing them at home and we can't really reach them very easily.

Bradley Pierce:

I mean, you can reach them, you know, through online and things like that, but that is something, an opportunity that you have in your state that we don't have here, and so I think I'm not saying that everybody is in your state that we don't have here, and so I think I'm not saying that everybody has to be called to do that, but I think everybody is called to do something to love our neighbors who are being carried to the slaughter, and so that's something that I think churches can and should be looking at how they can minister at those places.

Scott Allen:

Yeah, okay, super helpful. Well, listen, we probably need to be wrapping up. I really have appreciated the discussion and I resonate with so much of what you've. Well, listen, we probably need to be wrapping up. I really have appreciated the discussion and I resonate with so much of what you've said, bradley, and what you're doing, and just the clear principle of it. There's so much clarity to it, dwight, luke. Just final thoughts or responses as we get ready to wrap up here today.

Luke Allen:

Yeah, I've got a lot to chew on. I'm enjoying your doc series on abortion-free. I hope to finish that soon, highly recommend. So that'll be linked in the show notes, guys, if you want to check it out.

Scott Allen:

Well, just tell us too, how can people make themselves avail themselves of that documentary?

Bradley Pierce:

Yeah, it's on our YouTube channel Foundation to Abolish Abortion. But an even easier way to get to it is go to abortionfreecom.

Scott Allen:

Abortionfreecom. Watch it there, Okay. Well, I encourage our listeners to do that. Let's go and look at the work that Bradley's involved in here and give it a watch. Well, listen, I really appreciate what you're doing. I just am so grateful for your strong conviction and just your active involvement in this.

Scott Allen:

This is an abomination, it's. You know. We often look back at the days of slavery and we go how in the world could they have ever done that? We take this kind of morally superior stand? And yet here we are, on our watch and something even worse is happening, you know, just in terms of the loss of human lives, the murder of human lives. So you know, this is a serious issue and I appreciate the seriousness with which you're taking it and the work that you're doing. Again, it's the foundation to abolish abortion. Is that correct? Yes, sir, and so I encourage everyone to check out the website. Abortion Is that correct? Yes, sir, and so I encourage everyone to check out the website, the work that they're doing, and let's continue to learn and support and do what we can do wherever we're at. All. Right, guys, thanks for your participation in the podcast today and again grateful to all of our listeners. Appreciate you, guys tuning in. Thanks for listening to this episode of Ideas have Consequences. This is the podcast of the Disciple Nations Alliance.

Luke Allen:

Thank you for joining us for this discussion with Bradley Pierce. If this discussion was helpful for you and you would like to continue to delve into today's important topic, make sure to visit this episode's page, which is linked in the show notes. On that page, you can learn more about Bradley, the foundation to abolish abortion and the documentary series that we mentioned during the episode Abortion Free which is a great place to start if you, like me, are just realizing you really need to learn more about this abolitionist movement. Again, the episode page is linked in the description and it's also right on the homepage of our website, which is disciplenationsorg. Thanks again to each and every one of you guys for joining us today here on. Ideas have Consequences. We hope that you are able to join us again next week for another episode. Thank you.

People on this episode

Head Shot

Scott Allen

Host
Head Shot

Darrow Miller

Co-host
Head Shot

Dwight Vogt

Co-host
Head Shot

Shawn Carson

Co-host
Head Shot

Tim Williams

Co-host
Head Shot

Luke Allen

Producer