This phrase has been used to mean “adjusting to the increased demands of the task at hand.” At this time, pro-life people would surely embrace that phrase as they describe themselves and colleagues who are finding themselves busier than ever with both activism and direct care to women in need of help. Indeed, my sources universally inform me that there are increased requests for help by women in all kinds of circumstances. Being prescient of this need even before the Dobbs decision was released, the Supreme leadership of the Knights of Columbus asked councils across the country to be cognizant of the increased needs of pregnancy help centers and that they should endeavor to do more than in the past to try to meet those needs.

One of the most urgent challenges is to reach women in those communities where their babies are targeted for death. These are communities where people are under educated and underemployed and often under stress from several social factors. While we work to meet the needs of such women, we must examine public policies which fail to relief those conditions that drive women to the choice of abortion. This is being discussed more broadly as the upcoming elections provide hope that new people will examine failed policies and do new things with more promise. However, a weak economy with high inflation and persistent shortages of many products coupled with the looming specter of a wider military conflict in eastern Europe will likely limit options for quite a while, thus making it essential for pro-life people in their communities to expand help to women and babies and do more than in the past.

In the immediate aftermath of the Dobbs decision, we also saw a vast array of pro-life organizations roll out plans to extend even more help to more women, emphasizing love and compassion, and solutions for every need. Not to disappoint, our adversaries in the pro-abortion faction, rose to the occasion with hate speech and violence. One prominent legislator in Washington, DC, has called for elimination of centers that offer help to women because they actually abuse women (by not referring them for abortion), or that they should be forced to be renamed because pregnancy help center do not really “help” women (because they do not “help” them get abortions). If that kind of rhetoric is supposed to make people turn away from pregnancy resource centers and support abortion, I fail totally to see how.

In other developments, there is more talk about when does life begin and the issue of person-hood. In the former, there is the assertion that what is growing in the woman is a piece of amorphous tissue, that it is not anything human, not a “baby” (shudder-shudder). Therefore, for the sake of the woman with an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy, it only makes sense that the “it-thing” inside her should be “taken care of.”

I recently heard remarks in which this issue was addressed in an amusing way. It was asserted that one can argue at length about tissues and what is inside the woman, but one thing that cannot be disputed is this: what comes out of a woman’s body is a human baby. There is no point after conception when the growing entity was a lizard or dog…it was always a baby, not a piece of something else. Oh, sure…it was small and not completely formed, but still a developing baby. News flash ! When a baby is born, it still continues to develop…and when 20 years old it is still developing… and even at 80 years old the body is still changing and developing (albeit not in the direction we would choose). So, development of humans begins at conception and continues until death.

There is no stage at which the growing entity is not a human in development. So, let us cut the “crap” and just acknowledge that the argument is over who has the right to kill a developing person, and at what age… just a few weeks of development ? What about killing that person after 1 year, or 20 years? That is the debate, and make no mistake about it… learn from history when people gained power and decided who they would kill based on age, sex, religion, medical illness, heritage, language…. If we do not tenaciously demand respect for life in all its stages and conditions from conception to natural death, then we are vulnerable to all the exceptions.

In the Dobbs decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the 10th amendment gave to the people in the individual states the right to debate and vote on how abortion can be regulated in their own communities. The pro-abortion factions have now doubled-down on their rhetoric condemning their pro-life political adversaries as hating women and wanting to take away more and more of the rights women have struggled for over eons. This has grown out of a failure of other arguments for why voters should select incumbent pro-abortion politicians for re-election. The policies of incumbent pro-abortion politicians have been hugely unpopular and have resulted in economic hardships for vast segments of the population, and it is always the poorest and less well educated people and the newest immigrants who suffer most. Since they cannot run for re-election based on successful policies and popular achievements, they have decided to make access to abortion the primary campaign issue. This is mixed with the usual hate rhetoric and fear mongering that we have become used to… to the point that I think many people no longer hear it.

However, the US Catholic Bishops have responded to the misinformation with a “white paper” on the subject titled “The Truth About Abortion & Women’s Health.” In this document, it is well pointed out that abortion is never medically necessary. The point is made, which I also address in my book, that it may be necessary to deliver the child well preterm to save the mother’s life. In some cases, the child should be in ICU with hope of survival. In other cases, the child should be offered hospice in a dignified manner.

In an abortion, the procedure is carried out on a living child with the intention of ending that life. The document goes on to expose the bogus arguments that women denied an abortion will not be able to be treated for a miscarriage or an ectopic pregnancy. In these tragic cases, the developing baby has died and the mother’s life is in danger. There is no issue of trying to save the baby or of deliberately killing the baby. All, of these arguments are foisted on the uneducated and those already indoctrinated into an illogical and unscientific belief system for the purpose of distracting them from the reality of current events while gaining their votes for the purpose of hanging on to power… and power is money.. and some people will say and do anything for more money.

However, the National Catholic Register just carried an article “Previewing the Midterms” in which a recent poll by the Pew Research Center indicates that the economy is the top concern for 77% of voters. However, among Democrats, 71% now say that abortion is very important, whereas only 46% of democrats felt that way in March. That suggests that the Democrat echo chamber is working pretty well, but that the vast majority of people are concerned about the economy and what they have to pay for the things they must purchase in their every day lives. Data on other issues similarly shows that people have many important concerns but that abortion is far down the list. Nevertheless, expect to hear much deliberate misinformation and hate speech as the election nears.

For pro-life people, it is more important than ever to be informed and to disseminate the truth as widely as possible. As the Supreme Court ruled, the debates belong in front of the people, and the people must choose those leaders who will make the laws that govern their communities. Let us be wise, and let us educate our fellow citizens and especially our youth, and let us pray for the wisdom of our newly elected leaders.