John Stonestreet

According to ShoutYourAbortion.com (yes, that is a real website), women who want children are the abnormal ones. For example, Syd, who identified herself as a convert to Catholicism, wrote, “Thanks to my abortion, I will have a future.” Another wrote, “Abortion gave me a chance to focus on my own life.” An anonymous college student stated, “My future was worth it, and I am more than just a vessel to produce new life.” She then compared her baby to a tumor standing between her and her career.  

This website is among the legacies of a society now well into its fourth wave of feminism. Women see the procreative design of their bodies as a problem to be avoided or solved, not a gift of God. Between that consistent drumbeat and the celebrity voices equating abortion with “mercy” and insisting life without marriage and children is better (despite overwhelming research that suggests otherwise), it is no wonder that over one million women chose to end the life of their baby last year, 40% of young women think they should hold off having a baby until their career is established, and one-fifth of women say they would forego kids altogether for a career.  

Many young women believe they will be happier if they remain single and without kids. Yet studies continue to show that the happiest people on average are women who are married with kids. In other words, there is an incredible gap between perception and reality. God designed humans for relationships. For most, that means marriage. He made women to be child bearers and mothers, uniquely equipping their bodies, hearts, and minds to be life-givers in this way. Scripture says that there is joy in following the precepts of the Lord, which align with God’s works in creation. If true, we ought to expect that living out God’s design will bring happiness. God’s burden is light, after all. 

The fundamental ideas of the feminist movement, at least in its current form, is in direct contrast. Its adherents even find it necessary to re-write the lives of historical figures to align with their views. Thus, the new and improved Lady Jane Grey was a power-driven vixen who did not need a man, and Jane Austen even envisioned a nonbinary society. For historical figures to be considered great, they must have rejected repressive narratives of womanhood that value faith, family, or men. 

This kind of feminism betrays women and is especially dismissive of the many who face infertility or who desire marriage and family in this culture that no longer values either. God made humans in his image, male and female. Though a woman’s value is not determined by marital or maternal status, who God designed woman to be can neither be erased nor can it be replaced by some progressive vision of “freedom,” careerism, or sexual autonomy.  

The truth about women is, in reality, far more radical than the ideas so dominant in this cultural moment. Women are uniquely and wonderfully different from men. It should not be thought weird for women to desire to give life and then nurture and care for life. Women did this for Jesus throughout His life and at His death. The Bible portrays women as prophets, judges, and businesswomen, but also, in nearly every book of Scripture, as mothers and wives.  

It is often said that being a wife and mother are the highest calling for women. It is not. Glorifying God, in whatever role or stage of life, is the highest calling of all image bearers. We are to do that in whatever station we find ourselves, as male or female, because that’s how God made us to live. Too many women have been told to fear the design that God blessed them with, or to fight it in the name of “freedom.” In this cultural moment, that fear has undermined the sacred roles granted to women within families. That’s a tragedy because God’s design of His image bearers, male and female, is, as Scripture has said, very good.  

At the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC) conference in London, many referred to the past year of conservative wins in the U.S. and other Western nations as a “vibe shift.” Perhaps, but it’s just as clear that not everyone got the memo. Many legislative bodies have doubled down on far progressive ideology, showing how different laws actually reflect wildly different understandings of reality and the human person. 

 For example, a Colorado bill just passed through the House that would make “misgendering” the dead a class 2 misdemeanor punishable with up to 120 days in jail and up to $750 in fines. “If they happen to die of prostate cancer and their gender identity is female, that’s important information for us to have,” democratic Representative Karen McCormick, of Longmont, CO said. So, coroners and other officials who sign a death certificate that does not align with the deceased’s “gender identity” could face punishment similar to someone who runs a brothel. 

Biologist (and atheist) Colin Wright had a different take on the bill, 

[I]f a female who “identifies” as a male dies of ovarian cancer, recording her as “male” would skew medical stats and obscure real biological trends with fraudulent sex data. Over time, and across all medical contexts, this will mess with how we understand and tackle health issues. 

Meanwhile, the House Speaker for the state of Maine repeatedly silenced, and then House Democrats officially censured, state Representative Laurel Libby for arguing in session that men should not compete against women in sports. Pretending instead that the matter was settled, and that opposition is discrimination, this state legislative body is defying President Trump’s recent executive order on the matter. ADF General Counsel Kristen Waggoner described the situation in Maine as, “. . .the same old leftist playbook we’ve seen for years: shaming and silencing women who dare to point out the reality of what is happening in their sports.” 

Lawmakers in Scotland are also working to ensure that no challenges to abortion are allowed, from anywhere. According to ADF International, Sara Spencer, a young American mother, was suspended from her midwifery studies in Dundee, Scotland for posting to social media her belief that unborn children deserve protection. It remains unclear whether one can be arrested for a silent prayer at home against abortion in Scotland, as Vice-President J.D. Vance recently claimed.  

And in England, teacher Kevin Lister remains in a years-long legal battle against progressive speech codes. Lister refused to use a student’s “preferred pronouns” and was eventually fired, even though he was willing to accommodate by using a “gender-neutral communication style.” His case is ongoing. 

These episodes reveal that despite the dramatic change in the White House, nations do not live by executive orders alone. Culture matters, and culture is both reflected in and reinforced by political realities, especially in a local context.   

America’s divide, especially on issues of identity and sexual morality, is vast. In fact, the last time our nation was so divided, state by state, on an issue of such moral gravity, was over slavery. We are that divided again. In places like California and Colorado, lawmakers are becoming even more creative in enforcing their ideas and punishing any who oppose.  

It’s far easier when our political conflicts are merely about different policies that aim to accomplish the same goal. It’s far more difficult when the political landscape is about achieving different ends altogether. More than mere disagreements about how to achieve a shared understanding of human flourishing, our political realities point to fundamentally different ideas about what human flourishing is, or even what a human is.  

Because of these high stakes, politics matters and will continue to matter for the foreseeable future. However, behind the questions of elections, candidates, and policies are deeper ones, worldview questions that matter even more and are reflected in more than just the political realm. To fight in politics without addressing the worldview conflict upstream from politics will be, in the end, an exercise in futility.