Two Different Movements? Abortion Abolition vs Pro-Life
It is undeniable that support for the abortion abolitionist movement and cause has exploded since Dobbs was decided in June 2022, overturning Roe v. Wade.
From Abolitionists Rising’s videos and street agitation becoming a well-known part of the culture, to leaders like Lila Rose admitting that women should not be given blanket immunity from charges, to Seth Gruber admitting that he was wrong in his previous pro-life tactics and convictions—abolition is becoming unavoidable, while pro-lifeism is becoming an unpopular thing of the past.
Why is this happening? Because overturning Roe exposed the very big differences between the pro-life worldview and the abolitionist worldview. It put the cowardly, fruitless foundation of the pro-life movement on full display for all to see, with nowhere left to run and hide. The pro-life movement’s biggest goal—overturning Roe—was finally achieved after 50 years, and yet abortion remains legal in all 50 states, while the number of babies murdered through abortion continues to rise.
So what is it that makes people attracted to abolitionism as an alternative in the fight against child sacrifice?
Three things: unassailable truth, unwavering courage, and unshakable conviction.
People are desperate for bold, uncompromising truth in today’s world, especially among conservatives. They are tired of cowardly, ineffective, do-nothing leaders who claim to be fighters but then do nothing when given power. Abolitionism is the opposite of this.
The most frequently asked question abolitionists receive is, “But isn’t this just the same thing as pro-life, just bolder?” The answer is emphatically no. Abolition is not merely a bolder version of the pro-life movement. We are a movement built on an entirely different foundation.
The easiest way to explain our difference is through the five tenets of abolition (G.A.T.E.S.), contrasted with the pro-life movement’s tenets:
Gospel Centered vs. Gospel-less
Aligned Providentially vs. Worldly Pragmatism
Through the Church vs. Through the World
Established Biblically vs. “Any Means Necessary”
Sought Immediately Without Compromise vs. Sought Incrementally With Compromise
These five tenets are the center of the entire movement and are what make us categorically different from the pro-life movement.
Gospel Centered
“For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes…” — Romans 1:16
The issue of abortion, first and foremost, is a problem of sin, and that sin is murder. It is not merely a political issue or a social issue. Knowing that Jesus Christ defeated sin, death, and every work of the devil through His work on the cross, we understand that there is no hope for humanity, and there is no true possibility of abolishing evil in our land, apart from the gospel.
Unlike the pro-life movement, we know that science does not have the power to set us free. Political pragmatism cannot do that. Education cannot do that. It is only through Jesus Christ that we can overcome evil in our land, and Christians have understood this from the beginning.
This is why, if you watch an abolitionist minister outside of an abortion mill, it will look very different from the average pro-lifer. Abolitionists do not merely cry out, “Please don’t do it! We can help you with money, food, housing, etc,” to the women walking in to murder their babies. No, abolitionists cry out, “Don’t murder your baby! Repent and believe the gospel of Jesus Christ.” They let them know that what they are doing is a sin against a righteous and holy God, but that there is hope in Christ.
By pointing to the gospel, we are not just focused on saving human lives, but, more importantly, on saving souls from eternal damnation and pointing an entire nation back to Christ and repentance.
This is also why we reject the notion of mere course correction. Our movement demands personal and national repentance for the tens of millions of babies we have sacrificed in our land.
Aligned Providentially
“Duty is ours; results belong to God” is the battle cry of the abolitionist movement. We firmly reject the idea that we must prioritize pragmatism over obeying God, whereas the pro-life movement does not.
The statement, “WE AFFIRM that obedience to God is both the highest good and wisest action at any given time,” (The Norman Statement on the Abolition of Abortion) is what guides abolitionist tactics in everything they do. We ask first, “What does God command in this situation?” rather than, “What will most likely yield the best results?”
While I worked in the pro-life movement, I found that this tenet—fidelity to pragmatism—truly was at the foundation of all that they do. It is the cornerstone upon which the rest of the movement is built.
To put it another way: their trust in man’s abilities far surpasses their trust in God’s ability.
This became undeniably obvious here in Ohio in 2023, when we were campaigning against the abortion ballot initiative that enshrined child sacrifice into our state constitution. The pro-life movement paused all legislative efforts and created a coalition called “Protect Women Ohio.” They came up with talking points surrounding parental consent and late-term abortion, and made it a rule never to speak directly against preborn murder. They looked to public polling and surveys to decide their next move, not the Word of God.
I remember being in a meeting with consultants during early 2023, before the coalition was fully built, where they were discussing the decision to oppose passing any legislation that would protect the preborn. One of the pro-life leaders said, “We’re all pragmatists here, right? We obviously should not try to pass anything this year and mobilize the pro-abortion voters.”
Now, this might sound rational and politically wise at first glance, but upon inspection, this kind of thinking is actually quite foolish, as well as evil.
Think about what they are saying.
They are saying that they must allow child sacrifice to continue unopposed during the year of 2023, making those children acceptable collateral damage, so that they may save some in the years following. It is worth mentioning that Ohio Republicans had every ability to abolish abortion immediately in that moment—an anti-abortion supermajority in both chambers, an anti-abortion governor, an anti-abortion attorney general, and an anti-abortion state supreme court.
Instead of ever asking, “What has God commanded us to do in this situation?” they feared the pro-abortion left and looked the other way while children were dying, all while possessing the power to stop it immediately. This is classic fear-of-man cowardice disguised as political wisdom.
Through the Church
The local body of Christ must be the driving force in the fight against abortion. No other group of people will be effective in abolishing evil. As the Norman Statement on the Abolition of Abortion states, “only those to whom the gospel has been entrusted can truly and consistently bring the gospel into conflict with the culture of death.”
We do not believe that the fight to abolish abortion is a separate ministry from the regular church. We believe it is a natural outgrowth of the church and therefore must be led by it.
Whereas the pro-life movement does not view the church as necessary. They believe it is the Christian’s duty to vote a particular way, but they do not believe it is the body of Christ that should lead the fight. They see it more as a fortunate alignment that Christians overwhelmingly oppose abortion.
Where the pro-life movement believes the fight will be won through “education” and “spreading awareness,” abolitionists believe the abolition of abortion depends on waking the church from her apathy and calling her to repent.
Established Biblically
Unlike the pro-life movement, our worldview and foundation are inherently based on Scripture, and we do not shy away from this fact. We are proud, sola-scriptura-believing Protestant Christians who do not waver in our commitment to the Word of God. And we apply sola scriptura even to the realm of politics. “Because the Bible says so” is the most important sentence for us when it comes to reasoning and debate.
From the reason we oppose child sacrifice in the first place, to the tactics we employ while fighting it, to the legislation we put forth to abolish it—Scripture guides it all. Meaning, we do not tolerate anything that contradicts the Word of God.
This also impacts the very language we use when speaking about the issue, which is why we do not hesitate to use terms like “child sacrifice” and “murder” rather than euphemisms or softened language.
We stand against abortion because Scripture tells us that God made human beings in His image, and therefore we cannot murder fellow image bearers. Furthermore, this is why we cannot support bills that show partiality and acquit the guilty. Scripture commands us to stand against them.
Unfortunately, while there are many evangelical, Bible-believing Christians within the pro-life movement, the movement itself is not grounded in the sufficiency of Scripture. It is grounded in secularism and science. This is why many pro-lifers proudly tell you that their reason for being pro-life has little to do with Scripture and more to do with science. In fact, most pro-life leaders discourage grounding your arguments in Scripture when engaging in pro-life apologetics, teaching instead that you should make purely secular arguments.
Sought Immediately Without Compromise
One of the more obvious differences between the pro-life movement and the abolitionist movement is the legislation we support and the legislation we oppose.
The pro-life movement believes in what is historically known as “gradualism.” Today, it is more commonly called “incrementalism.” The abolitionist movement, by contrast, practices “immediatism.”
According to Dictionary.com, gradualism is “the principle or policy of achieving some goal by gradual steps rather than by drastic change.” In other words, it is the pursuit of legislation that increasingly regulates a particular evil while working toward eventually abolishing it completely. We see this in bills like partial-birth abortion bans or heartbeat laws.
Immediatism is the application of Jesus’s words in Matthew 5 and Matthew 18, where He teaches that the response to sin is immediate repentance and putting it away.
“And if your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away…” — Matthew 18:8
When applied to legislation, this means pursuing bills that fully abolish the evil and nothing less. This political strategy is most commonly associated with the abolition of slavery, through men like William Lloyd Garrison, who rejected bills that merely regulated slavery and instead demanded full and immediate abolition.
Abortion abolitionists pursue the same thing. We reject all bills that do not grant full and equal justice for the preborn by criminalizing abortion as murder for all who are involved—no immunity clauses, no exceptions.
The reason we reject incrementalism is not merely because we believe it is politically prudent to do so (though, to be clear, it is). No, we reject incrementalism because it is sinful and wicked according to Scripture. God’s Word is abundantly clear:
“He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are both alike an abomination to the Lord.” — Proverbs 17:15
“Show no partiality in judgment; hear both small and great alike. Do not be intimidated by anyone, for judgment belongs to God…” — Deuteronomy 1:17
Every single pro-life bill passed in American history has explicitly acquitted the guilty and shown partiality because every law includes an immunity clause for the mother murdering her child. Every law preemptively removes the blindfold from Lady Justice and says, “You are automatically innocent.” This is because the pro-life movement believes women who murder their babies in the womb are victims, too. They believe these women lack meaningful agency in their decision and therefore should not be held legally accountable.
Not only are immunity clauses sinful before God, but the regulation of child sacrifice is equally abominable. By writing laws regulating when, how, where, and by whom preborn murder may occur, we are allowing it to continue. We are regulating evil rather than “cutting it off,” as Christ commands us to do.
Instead, abolitionists write bills that simply state that all laws currently protecting born people must be equally applied to preborn people, meaning that if you murder an image bearer in the womb, you will be charged with murder. That is it.
Protestant vs. Catholic
The last difference I want to point out between the two movements is religion.
Despite the overwhelming majority of pro-life Americans being evangelical Protestants, the pro-life movement itself is a child of the Church of Rome. It is Catholic from top to bottom. Nearly every major leader and organization is led by Roman Catholics. This is not by mistake or happenstance; it is by design.
When working in the pro-life movement, it was very obvious that Catholics are prioritized in hiring and platforming. The in-group preference is noticeable. Conversely, I found that Protestants are often welcome as speakers or lower staff, but rarely are we given any serious leadership positions. We are often kept on a short leash within the movement.
My personal opinion of why this might be is that we are most likely to speak boldly about sin and call out compromise. During the 2023 "Protect Women Ohio" campaign, it was always the evangelicals who spoke out against the campaign's sinful tactics and talking points. Whether it was me, Created Equal's staff, Ohio Christian Alliance, or the staff at the Center for Christian Virtue. Every. Single. Time.
As stated earlier, the abolitionist movement is firmly Protestant. Because we are gospel-centered above all else and established biblically, this necessitates that our leaders and organizations be faithful Protestants who believe salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.
We are not seeking an ecumenical big tent. We are not seeking a seat at the table. We are seeking fidelity to Christ and His Word above all else, knowing that it is the wisest political strategy anyone can use.
Used with Permission. First Published on X (5/26/26) by @LizzieMarbach.