Dakota Boys and Girls Ranch

Your generosity is the key to healing and hope for our awesome kids.

You’re a friend and partner of the Ranch, so you know all about the good work your support makes possible. But there may be a few things you don’t know about us. And, I believe you’ll find the six Ranch facts below both enlightening and encouraging. For instance, did you know…?

  • The Ranch’s Dakota Memorial School is the only fully accredited school system in North Dakota that’s not a public school.
  • Many of our children were barely passing their classes before coming to the Ranch. Yet two out of five made the honor roll last semester, while meeting the same rigorous requirements you’ll find at any public school.
  • Many of our kids never had a birthday party until they came to the Ranch.
  • This year, many of our students returned to their original schools to graduate with friends and peers.
  • We care for and cherish a herd of twenty three horses. The children are encouraged to ride and make friends with the horses. They often experience healing as they ride and work with a horse.
  • Ranch thrift stores process more than eleven million donated items a year. Sales at our stores provide an important source of income to help kids.

I hope you learned something you didn’t know about why the Ranch is such an incredible resource for children who have struggled to find peace, stability, and success in life. Children like Sara . . .

Sara’s mom was young, single, and unable to provide for her. Violence and instability were constants in their home. No wonder Sara was angry, verbally abusive, disrespectful of authority, and hamstrung by learning disabilities that made school a daily battle.

At the Ranch, Sara experienced a very different kind of environment. Because our team recognized her struggles — and also her many strengths as a unique child of God — she responded positively.

Sara says, “It didn’t feel safe at my old school. But at the Ranch, if I need more help or things aren’t going well at home, I can tell someone and feel safe. I don’t have to worry that more bad things will happen because I told.”

Sara has been with us for about a year now. Her improved attitude, behavior, and school performance have earned her the admiration of her peers, who increasingly see her as a role model.

There’s a lesson here: With your partnership in this work, even a deeply wounded child can find healing, academic success, and spiritual growth. But we need your prayers and partnership so we can provide the specialized support these kids need.

Will you give now to equip a Ranch child to overcome the odds and move forward with confidence in school, in their healing, AND at home? Through your gift, you’ll provide the specialized support that makes it possible for a Ranch child to grow, learn, and prepare for a life of confidence, independence, and accomplishment. In His Love, Joy Ryan, President/CEO  |  Dakota Boys and Girls Ranch

Permanent link to this article: http://www.nodaklcms.org/blog/dakota-boys-and-girls-ranch/

The No-Casserole Illness

AND HOW THE CHURCH CAN RESPOND

It’s a conversation I’ll never forget. While visiting with a local pastor one day about the mental health focus of The Lutheran Foundation, he shared something he did one Sunday morning in church.

 As people gathered for worship, everyone received a sheet of paper with a list of ten questions related to mental health is­sues. There were questions like, “Have you ever been depressed?” and “Have you ever been prescribed medication for mental health issues?” Each person was to circle any question that applied to them.

When everyone finished answering their questions, the ushers collected them. They shuffled the papers and walked to a different part of the church to pass out those same sheets of paper. Each person was now holding someone else’s paper (no names were on them.) The pastor then started to read the questions, one by one, and asked people to stand up if the ques­tion he read was circled on the sheet they were holding.

When people in the congregation saw the number of people standing up in response to each question, there was an audible gasp from the congregation. “Everyone thinks they are the only one living with mental health issues,” the pas­tor said. Too often, the stigma is so great in the church that people are afraid to talk about mental illness.

While author Amy Simpson was growing up, her mother had serious psychotic episodes and was later diagnosed with schizophrenia. The family was always active in church. But when it came to her mother’s mental health issues, there was silence and shame. “We needed community and loving friendships,” she says. “The church is one of the only places left in society where that is readily available — at least in theory.” Amy tells her family’s story in her book, Troubled Minds: Mental Illness and the Church’s Mission. Amy says the phrase is not original with her, but she often refers to mental illness as the “no-casserole illness.” It’s not uncommon for people from church to bring a casserole when a family member is in the hospital, or when there has been a death in the family. But when it’s mental illness, people often don’t call or visit, or bring casseroles.

However, the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) reports that one in five adults will experience a mental illness in any given year. That also means one in five in our churches. Most people don’t re­alize that mental illness is more common than cancer, heart disease and diabetes combined.

The Lutheran Foundation is focused on promoting mental wellness and reducing stigma around mental illness. Starting the conversation and silencing the stigma is one step toward healing. Sometimes those caring conversations happen best across the table… over a casserole.Contributed through the LCMS Rural & Small Town Mission monthly newsletter By Rev. Dr. Dennis Goff, director of Ministry Programs for The Lutheran Foundation, Fort Wayne, Ind.

Permanent link to this article: http://www.nodaklcms.org/blog/the-no-casserole-illness/

“MAIN STREET LIVING” MEDIA MINISTRY – AUGUST UPDATE

“Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage–with great patience and careful instruction” 2 Timothy 4:2. With this in mind, please continue to share information about our LCMS “Main Street Living” media ministry with others. MSLN is broadcast each Sunday morning – and also available every day at www.mainstreetliving.com (then click on the link under the picture identified as “North (Fargo)”.

Thank you for your much needed financial support! Checks may be sent to “Main Street Living NORTH”, 821-5th Ave. S., Fargo, ND 58103, or donate by Credit Card or your PayPal account on the web site. God’s blessing in Christ!

“Main Street Living North” Programs for August 2019:

August 4:           Rev. Bill Aufdenkamp, Christ Lutheran Church, Elbow Lake, MN., and Zion Lutheran Church, Hoffman, MN., presents the message: “A Rich Harvest; Remember Who Grows the Crop!” based on Luke 12:17. Today’s “This Is The Life” program is: “The Visit” (During war time, A Christian’s response to tragedy becomes a witness to others.)

August 11:           Rev. Richard Biberdorf, Grace Lutheran Church, Carrington, ND, Grace Lutheran Church, Cooperstown, ND, and Zion Lutheran Church, Binford, ND, presents the message: “Don’t Give Up On God” based on Genesis 15:1-6. Today’s “This Is The Life” program is: “One Hour to Live” (Divine forgiveness for the truly penitent assures a man … and in the nick of time.)

August 18:          Rev. Dr. Larry Harvala, St. Paul’s Lutheran Church, Euclid, MN and Trinity Lutheran Church, Fischer, MN, presents the message: “By Faith” based on Hebrews 12:1. Today’s This Is The Life program is; “Trial By Fire”.

August 25:           Rev. Robert Hill, St. Paul Lutheran Church, Wimbledon, ND, St. Paul Lutheran Church, Kensal, ND, Our Savior Lutheran Church, Pettibone, ND, and Redeemer Lutheran Church, Woodworth, ND, presents the message: “For the Sake of a Few” based on Genesis 18:25. Today’s “This Is The Life” program is:  “Red Trap”.

“MAIN STREET LIVING” is a locally produced TV program that includes a 30 minute worship service led by participating pastors of the Minnesota North and North Dakota Districts of our LCMS, along with a 30 minute Lutheran Hour program (normally This Is The Life, along with occasional church-season specials).  Programs are broadcast at 9:00am Central time on the following FOX stations: KVRR Fargo-Moorhead Channel 15.1, KBRR Thief River Falls-Grand Forks Channel 10.1, KJRR Jamestown Channel 7.1, KNRR Pembina Channel 12.1, AND at 10:00am Central (9:00am Mountain) on the following WDAY & affiliate Xtra Channels:WDAY Xtra Channel 6.3 Fargo-Moorhead, WDAZ Xtra Channel 8.3 Grand Forks,KBMY Xtra Channel 17.3 Bismarck/Dickinson, and KMCY Xtra Channel 14.3 Minot/Williston – as well as the cable and satellite systems carrying these stations, some of which may have a different channel number, and archived on www.mainstreetliving.com (then click on “North (Fargo)”.

Permanent link to this article: http://www.nodaklcms.org/blog/main-street-living-media-ministry-august-update/

Active Stewardship in the Rural Parish

Where I serve, people are conservative. I don’t mean that they watch Fox News and listen to Rush Limbaugh (although plenty of them do). I’m talking about the deep-down conservatism that always asks the question, “Pastor, if we’ve been doing it this way for so many years, why would you ask us to change? Is the risk of messing up what’s been working just fine really worth whatever little marginal gain you think your new way of doing things will give us?”

That question may not always be put into so many words, but after 13 years in rural ministry, I’ve learned that that’s what people are thinking pretty much any time I make a suggestion for doing something new or different in our church. And I’ve come to appreciate the question. People are most conservative about the things they know best — and for good reason. Human life is short, and we humans are slow learners. The traditions we’ve been given by previous generations represent the distilled wisdom of the ages. So it’s a good question.

But wisdom, alas, is not the only thing handed down by our fathers, nor is it the only thing we are preparing to hand down to our children. If we’re not careful, we can also pass on our bad ideas, our laziness, and our mistakes.

So, to turn to the topic at hand, how are things in your congregation financially? How’s the stewardship of the people? Do you find yourself running short in the summer months? Do you run bulletin announcements asking people to dig a little deeper and put a little more in the plate to catch up to the budget in October, November, and December? Do you worry about closing the school, cutting a staff position, getting the roof fixed, or even being able to afford your own pastor?

I get around the Synod a lot, and I can tell you that I’ve rarely found a rural parish that doesn’t struggle with things like that. Indeed, that’s how I got into stewardship ministry in the first place: I had to face those challenges in the parishes I still serve.
So if what we’re doing is not working out, maybe it is time to learn and change. Maybe there are deeper, even more conservative traditions to follow when it comes to our stewardship: instructions from God’s Word on how to be active, faithful, generous, Gospel-centered stew¬ards of God’s good and gracious gifts.
I hope you can join me for a webinar on this topic in July. I’ll talk about what really works for stewardship in the rural parish (or any parish, really): putting the Word of God first, finding stewardship’s place in the Christian life and the theo¬logical task of the Lutheran pastor, and teaching generosity and the support of the Lord’s work in a faithful, authentic, natural way.

Contributed through the LCMS Rural & Small Town Mission monthly newsletter by Rev. Heath Curtis, Coordinator of LCMS Stewardship


Upcoming RSTM Events…

Don’t forget that Rural & Small Town Mission provides free monthly webinars on topics relevant to congregations in town and country settings. Up next is “Active Stewardship in the Rural Parish” on July 25, followed by “The No- Casserole Illness and How the Church Can Respond” on Aug. 22. Find past webinars in our archives.
Register for one of our Engaging Your Community (EYC) or Engaging the Wandering (ETW) events at lcms.org/ rstm. These partner events offer practical resources and communication skills for reaching out to our wandering members and our communities with Christ’s love. Contact your district office or ours if you are interested in holding an event near you.
Register now for the 2019 National Rural & Small Town Mission Conference, Running With Endurance: Eyes Fixed On Jesus, Nov. 14–16 in Minneapolis. lcms.org/rstm/conference
To see our calendar, visit lcms.org/rstm. Contact our office at 888-463-5127 or rstm@lcms.org.

Permanent link to this article: http://www.nodaklcms.org/blog/active-stewardship-in-the-rural-parish/

The stewardship conference you need.

Led by Synod’s Stewardship Director Rev. Heath Curtis and Assistant Director Rev. Dr. Nathan Meador, this conference will equip pastors and laity to think biblically and “Lutheranly” about financial stewardship in its broader context.

MORE THAN GIVING

A DOXOLOGY Conference on Stewardship

Sponsored by The LCMS Office of National Mission and Iowa District West

August 16-17, 2019

LCMS Camp Okoboji in Milford, Iowa


Your team or a committee from your church will bring home:

  • A fresh view of the undergirding theology of stewardship
  • A candid overview of the financial challenges facing most churches large and small
  • A preview of quality resources available
  • Practical tools for stewardship flowing from the presence of Christ through His means of grace.
  • The “More Than Giving” event concludes with a planning session preparing each congregational team to return home, having designed a year-round stewardship action plan and strategies tailored to its own unique setting.

Program Cost: $30 (includes program fee and instructional materials.)

Registration: Visit https://www.doxology.us/2019-more-than-giving-ia-insight/

Food & Lodging cost: Conference food and lodging options at Camp Okoboji range from $65-75 per person. The fee includes Friday’s lunch and supper as well as Saturday’s breakfast.

Please contact Kellie Jones at Camp Okoboji before August 7th to reserve and pay for food & lodging. 712-337-3325

Individuals staying at the Camp may check-in beginning at 10:30 a.m. on Friday, August 13th. Lunch will be served at noon. The program event opens at 1:00 p.m. on Friday and will conclude Saturday, before lunch.

Location: Camp Okoboji, 1531 Edgewood Dr, Milford, IA 51351Event registration open through August 6th, 2019

Permanent link to this article: http://www.nodaklcms.org/blog/the-stewardship-conference-you-need/

District Life News – July 2019

The board of Elders of Immanuel Lutheran in Wahpeton North Dakota has given their pastor, Rev. Matthew Tooman – Life Coordinator for the North Dakota District, 3 Sundays per year to share with LCMS North Dakota District churches.  If your church is sponsoring a life event and would like Pastor Tooman to share a sermon and/or a teaching time at the church or in the community, please contact him at looktoxp@reagan.com.   As you think about scheduling, the further out you schedule an event, the more flexibility in time. 

   The LCMS North Dakota District will receive fetal models from “Lutherans for Life.”  If you would like to use these models, please contact Pastor Matthew Tooman at 701-899-1976 to facilitate their use.  These are a great visual and tactile tool to teach about life in the womb.          As always, if you have a community event you would like to promote, please contact the district office directly or contact Pastor Tooman either by email:  looktoxp@reagan.com or by phone 701-899-1976. 

Permanent link to this article: http://www.nodaklcms.org/blog/district-life-news-july-2019/

June 2019 Installations

Rev. Philip Beyersdorf was installed as Pastor of St. Mark’s, Minot on June 9th. Pastors in attendance (L to R): Rev. Dr. Matthew Richard, Rev. Daryl Rothchild, Rev. Nathan Schieber, Rev. Philip Beyersdorf, Rev. Arie Bertsch, Rev. Josh Reimche, Rev. Scott Ramey, Rev. Tim Stout.
Rev. Brian Shane was ordained and installed as Associate Pastor at Beautiful Savior Lutheran Church, Fargo on Sunday, June 23, 2019.
(L to R) Back row: Rev. Bernie Worral, Rev. Chris Brademeyer, Rev. Steve Schulz, Rev. Leo Deitemeyer, Rev. Clark Jahnke, Front row: Rev. Adam Harvala, Rev. Christopher Waldvogel, Rev. Brian Shane, Rev. Howard Shane, Rev. Arie Bertsch and Rev. David Suelzle
DCE Susanna Danner was installed as Director of Christian Education at Immanuel Lutheran Church, Fargo on Sunday, June 23, 2019.
(L to R) Rev. Arie Bertsch, DCE Danner, Rev. Steve Schulz, Rev. Bernie Worral

Permanent link to this article: http://www.nodaklcms.org/blog/june-2019-installations/

LWML Fall Retreat

Visit http://www.ndlwml.org/events/retreat/ for more information.

Permanent link to this article: http://www.nodaklcms.org/blog/lwml-fall-retreat/

Follow convention news wherever you are

Whether you’re attending or not, you can easily keep up with all the news related to the 67th Regular Convention of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS), July 20–25 in Tampa, Fla. Here’s how to be informed before, during and after the convention.

Before

Everything you need to know about convention business is contained in the Convention Workbook and its accompanying booklet, Biographical Synopses & Statements of Nominees. Read and download both at lcms.org/convention.

During

   The opening Divine Service and all convention sessions will be livestreamed and archived at lcms.org/convention/livestream. For a detailed schedule, see lcms.org/convention. All times are Eastern Daylight Time.

   Shortly after a livestream ends, the archived video will be available for viewing. In addition, news stories will be posted to the Reporter website (reporter.lcms.org) throughout the convention, and nightly video recaps will be available at lcms.org/convention.

   Subscribers to LCMS News, the Synod’s free email news service, will receive daily updates with links to new stories and video recaps. To subscribe, visit lcms.org/reporter-signup.

   KFUO will broadcast live updates and interviews throughout the convention. Follow KFUO’s convention coverage at kfuo.org and facebook.com/KFUORadio.

   Finally, up-to-the minute convention updates will also be shared on the Synod’s official convention Facebook and Twitter accounts at facebook.com/LCMSConvention and twitter.com/LCMSConvention. To join the conversation, use the official convention hashtag, #JoyfullyLutheran, when you share convention-related posts on social media.

After

   Archived convention video will be available for viewing at lcms.org/convention/livestream.

   All stories posted during the convention will continue to be available at reporter.lcms.org.

   An extended recap of the convention’s actions will be published in the August print edition of The Lutheran Witness and posted online at witness.lcms.org. 

In the days and weeks following the convention, tune in to KFUO (listen at 850 AM in the St. Louis metro area and worldwide at kfuo.org) for continuing convention-related news and interviews.

Posted first on the LCMS.org website (https://blogs.lcms.org/2019/follow-convention-news-wherever-you-are) on June 13, 2019

Permanent link to this article: http://www.nodaklcms.org/blog/follow-convention-news-wherever-you-are/

Main Street Living – July Update

Faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.” Romans 10:17  With this in mind, please continue to share information about our LCMS “Main Street Living” media ministry with others. MSLN is broadcast each Sunday morning – and also available every day at www.mainstreetliving.com (then click on the link under the picture identified as “North (Fargo)”).

Thank you for your much needed financial support! Checks may be sent to “Main Street Living NORTH,” 821-5th Ave. S., Fargo, ND 58103, or donate by Credit Card or your PayPal account on the web site. God’s blessing in Christ!

“Main Street Living North” Programs for July 2019: 

July 7:  ADJUSTED SCHEDULE TODAY: Because the FOX Network will be airing a sports program this forenoon, we decided not to record a new worship service for today. The WDAY/XTRA stations will be airing a re-broadcast of the worship service from last year’s 4th Sunday after Pentecost led by Rev. Sean Daenzer, Trinity Lutheran Church, Great Bend, ND, and Peace Lutheran Church, Barney, ND. This can be seen at 10:00 am Central Time (9:00 am Mountain). The sermon is entitled: “A Church Full of Hypocrites” based on Luke 15:1-32. Today’s “This Is The Life” program is: “The Reluctant Witness.”

July 14:  Rev. Dr. Karl Weber, St. John’s Lutheran Church, Ottertail, MN, and St. Paul’s Lutheran Church, Richville, MN, presents the message: “The Good Samaritan” based on Luke 10:25-37. Today’s “This Is The Life” program is: “Harriett’s Wedding Day.”

July 21:  Rev. Sean Daenzer, Trinity Lutheran Church, Great Bend, ND, and Peace Lutheran Church, Barney, ND, presents the message: “Our Callings” based on I Kings 19:11-21 & Luke 5:1-11. Today’s This Is The Life program is: “Tragedy Near a Small Town.”

July 28:  Rev. Bernie Worral, Immanuel Lutheran Church, Fargo, ND, presents the message: “For the Sake of a Few” based on Genesis 18:25. Today’s “This Is The Life” program is: “Spite.”

“MAIN STREET LIVING” is a locally produced TV program that includes a 30-minute worship service led by participating pastors of the Minnesota North and North Dakota Districts of our LCMS, along with a 30 minute Lutheran Hour program (normally This Is The Life,” along with occasional church-season specials).  Programs are broadcast at 9:00 am central time on the following FOX stations: KVRR Fargo-Moorhead Channel 15.1, KBRR Thief River Falls-Grand Forks Channel 10.1, KJRR Jamestown Channel 7.1, KNRR Pembina Channel 12.1, AND at 10:00 am Central (9:00 am Mountain) on the following WDAY & affiliate Xtra Channels:WDAY Xtra Channel 6.3 Fargo-Moorhead, WDAZ Xtra Channel 8.3 Grand Forks,KBMY Xtra Channel 17.3 Bismarck/Dickinson, and KMCY Xtra Channel 14.3 Minot/Williston – as well as the cable and satellite systems carrying these stations, some of which may have a different channel number, and archived on www.mainstreetliving.com (then click on “North (Fargo)”.

Permanent link to this article: http://www.nodaklcms.org/blog/main-street-living-july-update/

Zion Claire City Celebrated 125 years!

Pictured (L to R), Rev. Arie Bertsch, Rev. Larry Johnson, Rev. Larry Harvala, and Rev. Paul Warnier

Zion Lutheran Church rural Claire City, SD celebrated their 125th anniversary on June 16, 2019, at 11:00 AM. North Dakota District president Arie Bertsch was the guest preacher.

Permanent link to this article: http://www.nodaklcms.org/blog/zion-claire-city-celebrated-125-years/

A Response to Seth Millstein’s “How to argue Pro Choice: 11 Arguments Against Abortion Access, Debunked

by Rev. Matthew Tooman

District Life Coordinator

LCMS North Dakota District

May 23, 2019


In an article titled “How to Argue Pro-Choice:  11 Arguments Against Abortion Access, Debunked,” Seth Millstein attempts to defend the practice of abortion and the value that many people place on the abortion industry as a tool for empowering women and ultimately society itself. 

Millstein sets forth 11 arguments that he says pro-life people use to defend life, and he formulates a response for each.    

In this paper, I will address each of Millstein’s responses from the stance of reason (accessing nature and discovering clues about life).

Of course, I hope that these arguments will appeal to Christians who believe in the Bible and confess that God made the universe. Hopefully, Christians will be encouraged in the faith and convinced to affirm life from conception to natural death. 

In our world, though, we must be able to convince people who do not trust the Bible.  Even some people who call themselves Christians deny the revelation of Jesus and as such come to differing conclusions about the value of life.  We must argue from reason in order to influence and change our culture of death.  If we are unable or unwilling to do this, we hand our nation and its laws and culture over to those who persuade our culture to believe the lies and false reason. 

Maybe, through reason, doors for proclaiming the Revelation of Jesus might open.  Ultimately, only Jesus can change the death that reigns in the human heart. 

Romans 1:18-23

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

Common Argument = Argument attributed to pro-life or antiabortion proponents.

Your Response = Seth Millstein’s pro-abortion response to the “common argument.” 

Common Argument #1: A fetus is a human being, and human beings have the right to life, so abortion is murder.

Your Response: I’m probably not going to convince you that a fetus isn’t a life, as that’s basically the most intractable part of this whole debate, so I’ll be brief.

A fetus can’t survive on its own. It is fully dependent on its mother’s body, unlike born human beings.  Even if a fetus was alive, the “right to life” doesn’t imply a right to use somebody else’s body. People have the right to refuse to donate their organs, for example, even if doing so would save somebody else’s life. The “right to life” also doesn’t imply a right to live by threatening somebody else’s life. Bearing children is always a threat to the life of the mother. A “right to life” is, at the end of the day, a right to not have somebody else’s will imposed upon your body. Do women not have this right as well?

The fact that Millstein calls the argument that a fetus is a human being “intractable” demonstrates a strategy that pro-abortion people have started to employ just recently.  Many scientific developments, especially in imaging, have diminished the ability of pro-abortion people to deny that the fetus is, in fact, a human being.  When viewing a 4d image of a baby in utero, it becomes challenging and overly cumbersome to deny that there is no real difference between that baby in the womb and that baby born.  Most pro-abortion people have given up on the argument.  Instead of arguing the humanity of the baby, pro-abortion people diminish the life of the baby by referencing its dependence upon the mother’s body. 

The dependency argument suggests that a human who depends upon the body of its mother is using the mother’s body.  Use implies the exercise of will.  The baby did not come to live according to its own will.  The will to produce the baby came from outside of the baby.  Just as much as the will to produce the mother came from outside the mother.  “Free will” is not a factor.  Neither the will of the child nor the will of the mother produced the pregnancy. The development of a human being has occurred independent of the will of the baby and independent of the will of the mother — equally.  This is natural.  If we can acknowledge that life happens apart from our will, and that natural processes often force our hand in things that we did not decide, in all kinds of instances, we can view the new life for what it is – human life.  The new life deserves protection and care because the life of the child has the same value as mine.  “My body; my choice” is a farcical statement.  It is not the case for the child…and it is not the case for the mother…and it is not the case for the father.  The very concept of choice falls well short of describing any part of bearing a child, and the baby’s body is not the mother’s body, and the mother’s body is not the baby’s body.   

We see this truth in other kinds of dependency.  A born baby depends upon its parents for nutritional support.  The will of a parent, or the desires of a parent, must change in order to satisfy the needs of another human being.  Many parents experience personal turmoil over this.  They experience an emotional shift as they experience a shift in their priorities because another life depends on them. No one really knows what they are getting into when they become a parent.  They find out along the way.  

Once this is established, the risks of pregnancy, (though arguably less than abortion:  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3560645/) take on new and positive meaning.  The risk accepted is a moral risk taken for the good of another human being who has no ulterior motive or darkly motivated will contrary to the mother. To refuse the risk would be immoral because it is the destruction of an innocent life that cannot defend itself.  

 Common Argument #2: If a woman is willing to have sex, she’s knowingly taking the risk of getting pregnant, and should be responsible for her actions.

Your Response: You’re asserting that giving birth is the “responsible” choice in the event of a pregnancy, but that’s just your opinion. I’d argue that if a mother knows she won’t be able to provide for her child, it’s actually more responsible to have an abortion, and in doing so prevent a whole lot of undue suffering and misery.

      But let’s look at this argument a bit further. If you think getting an abortion is “avoiding responsibility,” that implies that it’s a woman’s responsibility to bear a child if she chooses to have sex. That sounds suspiciously like you’re dictating what a woman’s role and purpose is, and a lot less like you’re making an argument about the life of a child.

Common Reply: No, because women can practice safe sex and avoid getting pregnant. If she refuses to use contraception and gets pregnant as a result, that’s her fault, and her responsibility.

Your Rebuttal: Not everyone has easy access to contraception, nor does everyone have a good enough sex education class to know how to use it or where to obtain it. But let’s just suppose, for the sake of argument, that everyone had access to free contraception and knew how to use it correctly. Even then, no contraception is 100 percent effective. Presumably, you oppose abortions even in cases where contraception fails (and it does sometimes fail, even

when used perfectly). If that’s true, you’re saying that, by merely choosing to have sex — with or without a condom — a woman becomes responsible for having a child. And that’s a belief that has everything to do with judging a woman’s behavior, and nothing to do with the value of life.

            In our society and culture, we want to make sex antiseptic.  We want sex without consequences, and we act like when consequences happen, it’s not fair.  When a man and a woman have sex, regardless of the precautions taken, pregnancy could happen.  That is why pregnancy is not a product of the will of the baby and it is not the product of the will of the mother and it is not the product of the will of the father.  Pregnancy happens, and the fetus is human.  The only way to assure that a woman does not get pregnant is for a man and a woman to refrain from having sex.  Unfettered sexuality and unfettered sex are not reasonable or safe.  We must return to teaching our children that sexuality has an appropriate context within the family defined by marriage between a man and a woman.  Men and women who have sex can receive responsibility for a child.  Any person who puts this responsibility on the woman alone denies that men have a moral obligation to care for a child resulting from their sexual act, and they also deny the responsibility of the community. 

Regardless, the value of the baby is not diminished.  When adults fail to fulfill their responsibility, the child should not suffer the consequences.  The baby’s value remains even when people act without thought or regard.  The pro-life community does create and support many life-affirming organizations designed to help mothers and children.  Seeking these organizations out is not hard.  Thousands of women and men would step in to help a pregnant mother through the course of a pregnancy and beyond. 

We must teach our children the proper place for sex and sexuality, and when mistakes happen we must love our children…even those not yet born. 

Should we call unfettered sex harmful?  Yes!

In the same breath, we must also affirm the humanity and value of both those who err in their actions and those who are conceived from the irresponsibility of others.  An error in judgment does not diminish the value of life.

Common Argument #3: But I’m okay with abortions in cases of rape.

Your Response: Why only in those cases? Are the lives of children who were conceived by rape worth less than the lives of children who were willfully conceived?

If preserving the life of the child takes primacy over the desires of the mother — which is what you are saying if you oppose any legal abortions  — then it shouldn’t matter how that life was conceived.

            Anti-abortion people who hold a consistent view of abortion do understand that a child conceived from rape is still a human being worthy of protection and care.  A person who believes that a child in the womb deserves protection would accept a law approving abortion in the case of rape and incest only out of expediency.  Abortions resulting from rape and incest represent less than 1% of all abortions.  To eliminate all but that one percent would represent a great improvement reflected in the number of lives saved. 

            Ultimately, one human life is not greater than a thousand.  Each human life has infinite value.  To persuade the nation to care for mothers who fell victim to rape or incest, and to care for a child of rape or incest, would certainly be better than to persuade a mother to kill her own child.  More and more people do believe, and act on the belief, that a baby conceived in an act of violence deserves protection. 

            May we all so love a victim of rape that we treasure her and help her take care of her child in the way that only a mother can.  An act of violence does not negate another act of violence.  Additional violence only increases violence. 

Common Argument #4: “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

            This argument is atypical of pro-life adherents.  Only a fringe few express this argument.  Pro-abortion people point to this unsubstantiated argument as proof that the anti-abortion movement rests in a hammock of unscientific propositions.  The actual truth is that science has proven the claims of the anti-abortion community that a baby in the womb is a human.  As an indication of this truth, fewer and fewer people who approve of abortion make the argument that the fetus is not a human person.  Even scientific writings and books and textbooks confirm the humanity and personhood of a fetus. 

            Pro-life people do not use quackery to support their propositions but do express themselves in legitimate, well thought out arguments.  Often supporters of abortion will call pro-life people ignorant sighting their arguments.  Ignorance is, in fact, no part of the conversation.  

Common Argument #5: Adoption is a viable alternative to abortion.

Your Response: This implies that the only reason a woman would want to get an abortion is to avoid raising a child, and that isn’t the case. Depending on the circumstances, the mere act of having a child in a hospital can cost between $3,000 and $37,000 in the United States. Giving birth is dangerous, too: In the United States, pregnancy complications are the sixth most common cause of death for women between the ages of 20 and 34.  Even before birth, there are costs to pregnancy. In addition to the whole “carrying another human being around in your stomach for nine months” thing, many women, particularly teens, are shunned and shamed for their pregnancies — not only by friends, families, employers, and classmates, but also by advertisements in the subway. There’s also the risk of violent retribution from abusive partners and parents.  In short, there are a lot of reasons a woman might seek an abortion. Adoption doesn’t address all of them.

            The cost of pregnancy and birth do not need to fall on the birth mother who is giving the child up for adoption.  Most adoptive parents will eagerly pay these expenses in order to add to their family.  Many pregnancy clinics (pro-life) will also seek out ways to help a mother give birth.  Many states allocate resources for this purpose.  If you value the life of a baby, there is always a way to cover the medical costs.   

            There are risks for the mother associated with giving birth, and there are risks for the mother associated with abortion.   To suggest that giving birth presents more opportunity for complication and even death than abortion does not bear out.  The risk for the baby associated with abortion is extremely high.  Most babies die…but not all of them.  Think about that!           

The possibility of violence does not justify the surety of violence.  Possible violence can be avoided and even overcome.  People in the community will help.  The need for help must be communicated, but there is help available.  We, in our communities, must stem the violence in our communities, and that includes the violence toward those who cannot lift a hand to help themselves. 

Ultimately, none of these things really can negate the truth that one human life is not more important than another human life.  Of course, when the mother’s life is in danger because the pregnancy is not viable the mother’s life should be saved.  This, however, is not like a regular abortion.  The value of the life of the baby is not pitted against the value of the life of the mother.  Ultimately, opposition to violence against the most helpless people in our world is a trump card that cannot be overcome reasonably. 

Common Argument #6: When abortion is legal, women just use it as a form of birth control. 

Your Response: Do you have evidence of this? Considering that contraceptives are cheaper, easier, less painful, less time-consuming, less emotionally taxing, and more readily available than abortions, it seems odd to suggest that women who’ve already decided to use birth control would select abortion as their preferred method. It’s more likely the opposite: Historical and contemporary data suggests that women will seek abortions regardless of whether or not they’re legal, but that when birth control

and contraceptives are more widely accessible; abortion rates go down.

            It is true that people abort their baby as a way of preventing birth.  Abortion is birth control.  Abortion is not contraception.  Contraception prevents conception.  Abortion prevents birth.  However, if we want to take this a step further, we can assert that most people choosing abortion do so for social or economic reasons.  The parents of the baby have devised some reason from the circumstances of their lives that justify in their mind the killing of a baby.  Clearly most people who have an abortion had sex even though they were not prepared to have a baby.  The reason for this is mind boggling and bound in our cultural value of “free sex.” 

Common Argument #7: Abortions are dangerous.

Your Response: When performed by trained professionals, abortions are one of the safest procedures in medicine, with a death rate of less than .01 percent. The risk of dying while giving birth is roughly 13 times higher. Abortions performed by people without the requisite skills and training, however, are extremely unsafe. An estimated 68,000 women die every year from back-alley abortions, which are generally most common when abortion is illegal and/or inaccessible. If you’d like to examine the health impact of banning abortion, consider Romania, which banned abortions in 1966. That policy remained in place for about 23 years, during which time over 9,000 women died from unsafe abortions, and countless others were permanently injured. That’s around two women dying every day. When the policy was reversed, maternal mortality rate plummeted to one-eighth of what it was at its peak under the no-abortion policy.

Abortions and maternal death rates in Romania, 1965-2010. Image credit: BMJ Group

The negative health effects of prohibiting abortion don’t end with the mothers.  Romania’s abortion ban sparked a nationwide orphan crisis, as roughly 150,000 unwanted newborns were placed in nightmarish state-run orphanages. Many of those orphans now suffer from severe mental and physical health problems, including reduced brain size, schizoaffective disorder, and sociopathy.

When abortion is illegal, it becomes exponentially more unsafe for both women and their children. You may not like the fact that women will seek abortions even when they’re illegal, but it is undeniably a fact nonetheless.

            The dangers of abortion for the mother are well documented.  If you approach research with an open mind, it is easy to find the data that tells the truth.   These dangers cover more than just death.  The killing of innocent people always looks like a solution, but it always creates more problems than it solves. 

Once we enter a discussion regarding abortion, we bring into consideration a new life.  A baby has been made.  This baby possesses its own body with its own characteristics.  This baby is unique from any other person that has ever been made.  Most abortions are fatal for the baby.  Some babies survive and some of those suffer – some for a short time and some for a long time.  Abortions are more dangerous than birth.  This makes sense since abortion aims at death rather than life.  Murder comes from darkness and always brings more darkness. 

Additionally, birth statistics have shown that our medical advances have improved the safety of giving birth.  These statistics are generally more accurate than statistic regarding abortion deaths because the medical personal have an interest in reporting deaths resulting from birth.  Researching why a baby dies helps prevent deaths in the future.  Abortion personnel, who are not always doctors and nurses, have no such interest.  Botched abortions demonstrate a failure in the abortion industry and a report of this failure does not serve the interest of those participating in the abortion industry.  Kermit Gosnell demonstrated this truth in how he operated his abortion facility.     

http://www.abortionclinics.ca/abortion-risks.shtml

https://www.jognn.org/article/S0884-2175(15)30513-X/pdf

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/58-horrific-details-from-the-kermit-gosnell-trial-that-you-do-not-want-to-read

Common Argument #8: What if Winston Churchill or Martin Luther King had been aborted?

Your Response: Are you saying abortion policy should be influenced by how good of a person a fetus ends up becoming? If that’s the case, what if Joseph Stalin or Pol Pot had been aborted?

            This argument is a twisted rendition of an old adage, “don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.”  Just because some people are born, who perpetrate evil acts does not justify the killing of babies who have not acted harmfully toward society.  We abhor all who destroy innocent human life.  This is the whole point.  Anti-abortion proponents are responding to the unjust taking of human life.  Just like Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt acted to thwart the holocaust so antiabortion activists act to thwart the chilling aggression against the most innocent among us. We should lament the good that could have come from each murdered baby’s life, but even more, we should lament the loss of life!

Common Argument #9: Many women who get abortions regret their decision later on.

Your Response: This is a pretty common argument. As with shaming of teen moms, it pops up in subway ads…

This is a bad argument. Should the government ban people from doing things they sometimes regret? Think of everything you’ve ever regretted — not moving after college, dating the wrong person — and ask yourself if you wish there had been a law to prevent you from doing that thing. You probably don’t, because you probably believe people should be able to choose their own paths in life regardless of whether they regret those choices later on. I agree, which is part of why I’m pro-choice.

            People regret drunk driving, too.  Sometimes a person regrets drunk driving because he wakes up in the morning with a hangover and a DWI ticket with a court summons.  Yes…that is a regret that we might shrug our shoulders and proclaim, “Get over it.  Do better next time.”  We might say that until we get past the hangover, the ticket, and the summons and find out that in a drunken stupor this young man killed a woman and her two babies in a car accident that really wasn’t an accident. 

            Regretting a sexual encounter is different than regretting the fact that you killed another person.

            Additionally, Millstein conflates two arguments inappropriately.  When a pro-life person says that many women regret their decision to abort, this is an argument against abortion.  Pro-life people use this idea in their rhetoric to convince people to walk away from abortion.  It is used to show the dangers of abortion in the life of a person. 

            The government is charged with the protection of life.  Never does a government make a law because people have regrets.  The government does not make laws for the interest of one individual’s feelings, but for the good of the culture and society.  Abortion is bad for the culture and society in which we live.  Abortion promotes death.  Abortion celebrates death.  Abortion says that the death of one person is good for another person or a group of people.  “Death makes things better.”  Violence against an innocent person becomes an acceptable pursuit in the culture.  Government has an interest in fighting this perception.  If death wins in our cultural conversation, that which truly defines our culture is destroyed, and ultimately so is our society.  The wholesale acceptance of abortion in our culture and society foments violence and the attitudes that lead to violence.  Life sustains our culture.  When we support life, we support our culture and society.   

            When a pro-life person advocates for laws restricting abortion, that person is acting politically and for the benefit of society.  When a pro-life person stands on a corner at an abortion clinic performing sidewalk counseling …well…this is a very different activity. 

Common Argument #10: Taxpayers shouldn’t be forced to pay for things they find morally disagreeable.

Your Response: By that rationale, America also shouldn’t have a military, since that’s funded by taxes, and many taxpayers find American foreign policy morally disagreeable. Also, the Hyde Amendment prevents most public funds from going toward abortions. But that’s a moot point because these are two separate arguments. Believing that abortion should be legal doesn’t require you to also believe that taxpayer dollars should fund abortions.

            Millstein’s reflection that “believing in abortion should be legal doesn’t require you to also believe that taxpayer dollars should fund abortions” is true.  You can hold the two issues distinct.  In fact, most anti-abortion people will address these as two distinct, but related issues with different strategies.  It is the desire of the pro-life community to erode the social, political, and economic basis of abortion.  Pro-life people want our nation to end abortion through the process by which our republic is established.  The same process by which we have established and defend our nation and identity.  Pro-life people want abortion removed from the fabric of our society.  Antiabortion advocates will address the abortion issue from different vantage points depending on the circumstance and context of the conversation.  If a law must change, anti-abortion advocates will work in a legal arena.  If the economic underpinning of abortion must be eroded, anti-abortion advocates will address the economic realities where they exist.  If the heart of a man who caused an unplanned pregnancy leans toward death, the pro-life person will talk and share and be present in that man’s life in whatever way possible. 

Common Argument #11: What if your mother had aborted you?

Your Response: Well, if I’d never come into existence in the first place, I probably wouldn’t have any strong feelings on the matter. Anyway, I love my mother very much and respect her right to make whatever decisions are right for her body and life.

Love is a dish that only life can serve. 

Summary:

Life is not subject to our will.  To suggest that it is, promotes a demonstratable lie.  Sometimes morality and circumstance require a change of will. 

Sexuality is never antiseptic.  Sex always comes with responsibility for men, women, and the community.

A child conceived in a violent act (rape) is still human.  Another act of violence against the child will not solve the problem of violence. 

The pro-life, anti-abortion position is a well thought out and considered position.  To dismiss or malign pro-life people as ignorant demeans the conversation.  Thoughtless words on both sides of the debate do not define the debate. 

The dangers of abortion are often hidden because the consequences of abortion may not express themselves until much later, and it is not in the interest of the abortion industry to report the dangers or the tragedies.    

Adoption as a solution for an unwanted pregnancy serves the needs of the mother, the family, and society.  Adoption is always a better option than abortion because adoption serves the needs of life.  There are always solutions to the obstacles that might be in the way of adoption. 

Abortion kills the innocent.

Government has the responsibility to protect life and promote a culture of life.  A culture of death will destroy society by undermining the foundation of that society. 

Antiabortion advocates approach the issue of life from many angles.  The goal is not just to change the law, but to change hearts and mind, too.

Love and life go together.  Without life, there is no love. 

Permanent link to this article: http://www.nodaklcms.org/blog/a-response-to-seth-millsteins-how-to-argue-pro-choice-11-arguments-against-abortion-access-debunked/