In fact, there’s quite a bit of discussion about what to call the other side. Some feel that we need to call them pro-choice and find common ground with them and then ease them into our point of view. The pro-lifer doesn’t want to offend them, so they take the soft approach. Then there’s another pro-life view that we should just cut out the nice method and directly tell them that abortion kills a baby and that they are pro-abortion. “Look at this picture of an aborted baby. That is the killing of a human.”

Of course, along with these, there are many other methods: showing the ultrasound image, legislation advocacy, participating in marches, having pro-life internet sites, sidewalk counseling, praying or other religious activities, donating money, etc.

Most of these methods have had a limited degree of success that can be quantified. The problem in analyzing which method is best is that there usually isn’t a way to get concrete statistics because there often is such a delayed reaction. For instance, if a person sees a picture of an aborted baby, they may be initially repulsed and verbally attack the pro-lifer. But because of seeing that photo, they may decide to keep their baby if they are pregnant in the future. Another example is that legislation that is closely shot down this year, might have an easier time passing next year, because both sides have had a chance to closely examine the issue and maybe a compromise occurs. The methods that seem to have the most direct impact on the other side, such as sidewalk counseling, seem often to be favored by many pro-lifers because of the immediacy of the result.

So what is the most effective way to convey the pro-life message? There is no right answer because each method is needed. Also, every pro-lifer is wired in a unique way that makes a certain method work best for them. Someone may have the gift of conversing with a girl as she enters an abortion mill but might have a tough time putting their thoughts down on a website. Also, someone who is comfortable being very confrontational might not have patience dealing with politicians in a legislature. Someone who works with the political process might have no desire to interact with college students at a pro-life exhibit.

The receivers of the pro-life message also have their own set of biases which could make one method work better for them. For example, if they are not particularly religious, they probably will be turned off by someone quoting scripture or talking about how God disapproves of killing. Then the pro-life message is shot down before it can take hold. There are many who are visually oriented who would grasp the message from an video of an abortion or aborted baby photos. Many of these same people might not change their abortion position by just verbally discussing the issue with a pro-lifer.

In conclusion, all of these methods are needed to make the whole pro-life movement work. Some seem to have better results than others, but one baby saved by any method is enough to say that approach works. Most causes, both liberal and conservative, have many different methods for the same belief, like spokes on a wheel: the financial aspect, street activism, legislation, internet sites, and even a religious aspect at times. The pro-life movement needs to be cohesive even when there are differing methods to reaching the same goal - saving the unborn babies.

Continue Reading