Life or Death: The State of Abortion Law in California
I want to step back and revisit a major topic that we saw discussed all throughout the Presidential Election cycle, as well as argued over during the Presidential and Vice-Presidential debates. That topic is abortion. All throughout the summer and fall we heard various claims about abortion from both political parties, like the accusation that Trump would sign a federal abortion ban if he took office, or that Democrat majority states allow abortions through all nine months of pregnancy, and even after birth.[1] These claims stirred up questions about the state of abortion across the nation as voters tried to decide whose vision for the future of abortion in America they most aligned with. For many, this issue alone is the one that decides their vote. For those who are staunchly pro-life, the only option was to vote for Donald Trump, even if he was far more compromised on the topic than they would have liked. For those who are pro-choice, this issue was the one that Kamala Harris built her platform on. But now that the Presidential Election is over, and we have a pro-life President, Senate, and House, there are now important questions that have to be addressed – specifically for us, where do abortion rights stand in California today?
Does our state protect abortion, and if so, up to what point is it allowed? Are there any limiting factors? Is infanticide allowed under state law? Are “abortion rights” enshrined into our constitution? Did the overturning of Roe v. Wade affect abortion in California at all? Will President Trump’s policies affect abortion access on our state’s level? As we saw recently, Governor Newsom has vowed to protect “reproductive rights” over the course of the Trump administration, but what exactly does that mean, and is that a valid position?
We need to know the answers to these questions. While it may be obvious that California is no enemy to abortion – and no friend to pro-life clinics – it is still imperative that we have clarity on the specifics of our abortion laws so that we know how to better engage in the national conversation, as well as to influence our state. If we are armed with the facts, with the truth, then we can disarm false claims, and we will be better prepared to stand for our values.
Current Events Regarding Abortion
With everything happening in California, what got me thinking about abortion? There have been several current events in the news lately that have brought abortion back to the forefront of the national conversation. You may or may not have seen that the 52nd National Walk for Life took place two Fridays ago, on January 24th, and that for the first time, the President, Vice President, and Speaker of the House all spoke to optimistic pro-lifers at the event. Vice President J.D. Vance made these remarks, which I have seen trending across social media since, “Let me say very simply, I want more babies in the United States of America. I want more happy children in our country. And I want beautiful young men and women who are eager to welcome them into the world and eager to raise them.”[2] This marked a significant moment in history for pro-life advocates, as representation from within the highest ranks of government legitimized their hopes that there could one day be a world where abortion is unthinkable.
We also saw that President Trump issued Presidential Pardons for all 23 pro-life protestors who were arrested, prosecuted, and jailed under the Biden Administration. Many of these protestors were elderly women, and all of them were convicted under the Freedom of Access to Clinics, or FACE Act, due to peacefully praying and singing hymns outside of abortion clinics.[3] Many pro-life organizations had been calling on the President to issue the pardons as soon as he entered office, and the overwhelming response to the news was “promises made, promises kept.”
But not all news around abortion was good news for pro-lifers, as these events came just two days after the U.S. Senate failed to advance House of Representatives Bill 26, known as the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. H.R. 26 would require health care practitioners to provide a certain standard of care to infants who survive abortion and are born alive during the procedure, as well as establish criminal penalties for providers who do not abide by the care outlined in the bill.[4] It was passed in the House back in 2023 but has been stalled in the Senate ever since. This vote was specifically about advancing the bill forward, so it wasn’t even a final vote for passage, but even the vote to advance it was denied by a 52-47 vote. They needed 60 votes to move it forward.[5] The votes went along party lines, meaning that all Republicans voted yes, and all Democrats voted no, keeping the bill from moving to the Senate floor.
Over the next four years of the Trump Administration, I am sure that we will continue to see abortion come up as a frequent topic of conversation. Ever since the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, abortion laws have gone back to the states, meaning that there isn’t a federal stance or federal law either permitting or outlawing abortion across the country. If our laws in California can differ from laws in other states, then we need to be equipped on what those laws are.
History of Abortion Law in California
Let’s start by walking through the history of abortion law in California. How did California get to the place that it is at today on the issue? How did abortion rights become popular in our state? What are the major pieces of legislation passed that shaped how life looks in our state regarding access to abortion?
Before 1967, abortion was illegal across California with the only exception being in instances necessary to save the life of the mother.[6] One of the first calls to change this came from the American Law Institute – a group of judges, lawyers, and legal scholars that creates models for criminal law reform. In 1962, the ALI created a Model Penal Code on Abortion, which included recommendations to allow abortion in instances of rape, incest, fetal abnormalities, and threat to the woman’s life or health.[7]
This coupled with an increase in media attention covering the stories of women seeking abortions, sparked states to slowly begin adopting the recommendations of the ALI, with Colorado being the first state to reform their abortion laws. Ronald Reagan was Governor of California at the time, when he agreed to pass the Therapeutic Abortion Act in 1967. This Act permitted abortion in the case of rape or incest, as well as danger to the life of the mother or the mental health of the mother, but limited abortions to 20 weeks into pregnancy. Governor Reagan did not agree to the stipulation that abortion be allowed for severe birth defects, nor for inconvenience to the woman.[8] Ultimately, this act is what would open the door to complete reform of abortion law in California.
Two years later, there was an important court case, the case of the People vs. Belous. A pregnant woman sought an abortion in California from physician Leon Belous, who refused to perform the procedure, but referred her to another doctor who would. The police became aware that this other physician was performing illegal abortions, and they linked them back to Dr. Belous who had been recommending him.[9] Belous was convicted, but later appealed, and in 1969 the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of the doctor, arguing abortion is a right protected under the right to privacy and equal protection clause in the state constitution. This was the first time any state had ever connected privacy rights to abortion rights, and it set the precedent that would be used in Roe v. Wade four years later.[10]
In 1972, still before Roe v. Wade, California voters voted by an overwhelming 62% majority to pass a constitutional amendment that added this right to privacy in the state.[11] The aftermath would be the court’s ruling in yet another case, this time the Committee to Defend Reproductive Rights v. Myers, in which the California Supreme Court stated, “the protection afforded the woman's right of procreative choice [is] an aspect of the right of privacy under the explicit provisions of our Constitution."[12]
But this case took it yet another step further. The Myers case would mean that state funding, such as Medi-Cal programs, could not discriminate to exclude funding a patient’s medical costs associated with abortion procedures. The majority opinion read:
“We face the much narrower question of whether the state, having enacted a general program to provide medical services to the poor, may selectively withhold such benefits from otherwise qualified persons solely because such persons seek to exercise their constitutional right of procreative choice in a manner which the state does not favor and does not wish to support.”[13]
Basically, the idea was that if the state could fund medical expenses related to childbirth, it would also have to fund medical expenses related to abortion, as both were part of reproductive choice. This was yet another landmark case that would make California one of the most abortion-accessible states in the country.
All of that – expanding abortion not only to life endangerment, rape and incest, or mental health, but also enshrining privacy as a fundamental right in the constitution, which was interpreted to apply to abortion, and requiring state funding for abortions – all of that happened by 1981. I usually think of California’s abortion laws as modern, as something our progressive government has aggressively pushed in recent decades – and that is partially true, as there are more recent developments to still consider – but the reality is that the majority of abortion reform in our state was established prior to the 21st century, as a snowball effect from the moment that Ronald Reagan opened the door to more exceptions than were originally allowed. Later, Reagan admitted that he regretted signing the Therapeutic Abortion Act, calling it a mistake and conceding that it let to “abortion on demand.” During his presidential campaign he stated, “If I had it to do all over again, I would have more restrictions than I agreed to. I placed too much faith in those who were entrusted with insuring that the patient met the terms of the bill.”[14]
The Impact of Overturning Roe v. Wade
By this point, you’re probably wondering, what more could our state even do? It seems like everything was addressed by the 1980s, so why has there been further legislation? The important thing to understand is that up to this point, most of abortion law had been decided through court rulings. Notice I didn’t really mention many laws, most were precedents set by California Supreme Court rulings. While precedent is important, and can be binding, it can also be changed as legal interpretation changes or is revisited. This meant that the official laws on the books for abortion by the early 2000s were still the provisions set out by the Therapeutic Abortion Act way back in 1967. So, in 2002, a new law was signed by the Governor to officially enshrine the right to abortion, by means of the constitutional right to privacy, into state law. This was Senate Bill 1301, known as the Reproductive Privacy Act.[15]
Wasn’t this already IN the state constitution? The constitutional amendment passed by voters in 1972 added the right to privacy – but this could apply to many issues. It was only the legal precedent set by the Court in the Belous and Myers cases that connected the right to privacy to abortion. The Reproductive Privacy Act officially sealed the connection between the two into state law, thus guaranteeing a right to abortion.
Just where does that leave us with Roe v. Wade being overturned by the Supreme Court in 2022? After all, this was based on the same legal reasoning. By codifying abortion access into law before the Dobbs decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, California ensured abortion rights would be protected on a state level, regardless of what happens on a federal level. Roe is a prime example of why the 2002 Act was passed – because as a law, it is much harder to undo than a legal precedent which could be overturned by a landmark case. This means that abortion access was not affected in the state of California in the aftermath of overturning Roe v. Wade. This also means that for pro-life activists, removing abortion rights in California would necessitate either a constitutional amendment and legal reinterpretation of the right to privacy, or the rolling back of decades old laws protection abortion access.
But, in the wake of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health decision in June 2022, California did not pursue those options. Instead, our state doubled down on protecting abortion rights. In November of that year, voters passed Proposition 1, which amended the California Constitution to explicitly state that women have the fundamental right to choose “whether or not to have an abortion, and whether or not to use contraceptives.”[16] It passed by an overwhelming 67% yes vote.[17]
It hasn’t ended there, because not only has California insisted on protecting abortion as a right for all women who live in the state, but California has also branded itself an abortion sanctuary state through the passage of several shield laws. In September of 2023, Governor Newsom signed Senate Bill 345, stating that California will not deliver over a person who is charged with a crime related to abortion to law enforcement officials, specifically for out-of-state prosecutions wherein a woman either travels from a state with an abortion ban to California to receive an abortion here under California law, or seeks telemedicine from a California practitioner while in a state where such care is illegal.[18] One example of how this law works would be if a doctor had a telehealth appointment with a patient in a state like Florida, where there is a 6-week abortion ban, and prescribed abortion pills to the patient for her pregnancy past the time it is legal in Florida, then California will not cooperate with law enforcement officials for the prosecution of the California-based doctor.[19]
To sum all of it up: in California, abortion is a state constitutional right up to the point of viability, which is defined as around 24 weeks or 6 months, as well as after viability if necessary to preserve the life and health of the mother including mental health.[20] There is no parental consent required for a minor to receive an abortion, abortions do not have to be performed by a physician, and an ultrasound is not required before an abortion.[21]
Debunking Abortion Claims
Since we now know both the history and current laws in our state protecting abortion access, we can revisit some of the common claims that are made in the media about abortion, especially ones that were made throughout last year.
First, I have seen repeatedly that the overturning of Roe coupled with a second Trump Administration will strip women of their right and access to abortion. This is not true across the country. What overturning Roe v. Wade did was it threw the issue of abortion rights back to the states. Now, some states had trigger laws that said if Roe v. Wade is overturned, then the laws protecting abortion would be reversed. California is not one of those states. As we just looked at together, California has done the absolute most to protect and enshrine abortion into legal precedent, state law, and our state constitution. It is up to each state to decide what laws to pass about abortion, which should be in line with the will of the people the legislature is representing. In California, abortion isn’t going anywhere.
Second, birth control will be banned next. Again, this is not true across the country. I haven’t heard of any state trying to ban birth control, but just sticking to California specifically, remember that Proposition 1 passed in 2022 didn’t just state that it is the right of every woman to choose whether to get an abortion, but also that it is a right to choose whether to use contraceptives, or birth control. So, in California, the right to birth control also isn’t going anywhere.
Third, victims of rape or incest will be forced to give birth. Again, this could depend on your state, but just looking at California, rape and incest have been exceptions for abortions since 1967, and the laws around it have only grown stronger since. This is not in danger in California.
Fourth, women will be jailed for miscarriages. This isn’t true anywhere in the United States, but especially not in California where abortion is legal through 6 months for any reason, and through all 9 months for specific cases. If abortion, which is the intentional ending of a pregnancy, is legal, then it’s abundantly clear that miscarriage, which is the unintentional and tragic loss of a pregnancy, is not a criminal offense. The Health Safety Code even specifically includes miscarriage in the list of incidents that a woman or doctor could NOT be held criminally responsible for, along with stillbirth and abortion.
Fifth, interstate travel for abortion will be criminalized. Based on the abortion sanctuary state status that California has protected via its shield laws in recent years, out of state patients are able to come to California to receive an abortion, and California will not aid in the prosecution of the related physicians for doing so.
Born Alive Infant Protection?
The last claim I want to look at is a very important one, and one you might have seen or heard about at the time that Proposition 1 was passed in 2022, and that is that California legalized infanticide by allowing the murder of a baby up to 28 days after birth. Is this claim true? Where did this claim even come from?
Originally, Proposition 1 added the following section to the Health Safety Code:
“Notwithstanding any other law, a person shall not be subject to civil or criminal liability or penalty, based on their actions or omissions with respect to their pregnancy or actual, potential, or alleged pregnancy outcome, including miscarriage, stillbirth, or abortion, or perinatal death.”[22]
It was the last part of that sentence about perinatal death that sparked concerns. The problem is that the bill did not specify what was meant by perinatal death, so it could have been as broad as any death of an infant for any reason within the first month of life – which would include infanticide. The author or the bill claimed that the intention of this clause was meant to prevent the prosecution of parents whose newborn died for any pregnancy-related reasons upon birth.
The language was amended before the passage of Proposition 1, so that it no longer read just as perinatal death, but specified “perinatal death due to causes that occurred in utero.”[23] This was meant to quell the concerns about infant death within the first month of life due to reasons not related to pregnancy, like murder or neglect. So, it actually is NOT true that California has legalized infanticide.
But this brings us to an even larger question than legal infanticide, because as I mentioned earlier, the U.S. Senate was trying to move forward a bill on protections for infants born alive during abortion procedures, but it did not receive enough votes to make it to the Senate floor. Are there protections in California for infants born alive during abortions? If so, what are those protections?
In the California Health Safety Code, there is one line under “Article 2: Abortion” that speaks to born alive infants. It reads, “The rights to medical treatment of an infant prematurely born alive in the course of an abortion shall be the same as the rights of an infant of similar medical status prematurely born spontaneously.”[24] This is more protection than states like Minnesota and New York have in place, but it falls very short of the stipulations that would have been passed in the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. What is missing from California law?
Well, pretty much any detail as to what those rights are that an infant is entitled to, as well as any specification as to the medical care required. For example, it does not include language that “practitioners must exercise the same skill, care, and diligence for infants who survive abortion that would be rendered to any child born at the same gestational age.”[25] It also does not require immediate hospitalization or transport to a hospital in the case the baby is born alive in a facility. Most importantly of all, it does not establish any penalties for not complying with the born alive protections, so there is no way to enforce this. California also is not required to report statistics on infants born alive during abortions and the care they receive, so even if it is happening, or even if babies are being neglected, there is no way to track them and follow-up on them. In essence, while California has one line that could be considered a form of protection for these infants, they are weak at best and completely ineffective and negligent at worst.
Response to California’s Abortion Laws
We have looked at the history of California’s abortion laws, we have carefully examined just what is in place in our state around abortion, and we have used that knowledge to address some of the claims heard all throughout the Presidential Election about abortion. What is my response?
There is so much I could say on this. I could go into statistics and numbers on how our abortion laws have been expanded and abused to perpetuate abortion on demand throughout all nine months. I could talk about how the health of the mother is such a broad exception that there are essentially no limits on a woman obtaining an abortion within her third trimester of pregnancy – and that these are actually not as rare as the media make them out to be. I could even go more into statistics on infants born alive during abortions, as it is a tragically common occurrence – even more common than we know given that most states are not required to retain regular reporting.
But instead of doing all that, I want to sit in one reality that will shape how we view all these different policies: a baby is a full life, deserving of human rights, protection, love, and medical care from the moment of conception.
You don’t have to be a Christian or a conservative to believe that. Former abortionist, Robert Siudmack, admitted as much when he stated:
“As a doctor, I know, as do my colleagues, that life begins at conception. That life begins the moment of conception is no longer a matter of personal opinion. It is an established medical fact. And this fact is not in dispute in any reputable medical textbook in the world. At the beginning of conception, a distinct, living, and whole human organism is formed.”[26]
In fact, in a scientific breakthrough back in 2016, scientists discovered that they were able to capture the very moment life begins through a burst of fluorescence. The study found:
“Human life begins in bright flash of light as a sperm meets an egg, scientists have shown for the first time, after capturing the astonishing ‘fireworks’ on film. An explosion of tiny sparks erupts from the egg at the exact moment of conception. Scientists had seen the phenomenon occur in…animals but it is the first time is has been also shown to happen in humans.”[27]
The American College of Pediatricians put out a statement in 2017 affirming that unique human life begins the moment the embryo is created, or in other words, at conception.[28]
Ultrasounds clearly show that embryos, or fetuses, or whatever else babies are referred to as in the womb, are not just shapeless blobs, but they develop fingers and toes, facial features, arms and legs, distinct characteristics that prove they are human. Former abortionist Dr. Bernard Nathanson changed his beliefs about abortion because of an ultrasound. He asked a fellow physician to record an abortion via ultrasound as he performed it. The two physicians watched the ultrasound back together, and about that experience he said, “When he looked at the tapes with me in an editing studio, he was so affected that he never did another abortion. I, though I had not done an abortion in five years, was shaken to the very roots of my soul by what I saw.”[29]
Abby Johnson, a former Planned Parenthood clinic director, describes her experience of witnessing an abortion-guided ultrasound in her book, Unplanned. I want you to read an excerpt from her book. It’s a little long, but listen to what she experienced:
“I was expecting to see what I had seen in past ultrasounds. Usually, depending on how far along the pregnancy was and how the fetus was turned, I’d first see a leg, or the head, or some partial image of the torso, and would need to maneuver a bit to get the best possible image. But this time, the image was complete. I could see the entire, perfect profile of a baby… The cannula — a straw shaped instrument attached to the end of the suction tube — had been inserted into the uterus and was nearing the baby’s side. At first, the baby didn’t seem aware of the cannula. It gently probed the baby’s side, and for a quick second I felt relief. Of course, I thought. The fetus doesn’t feel pain… The next movement was the sudden jerk of a tiny foot as the baby started kicking, as if it were trying to move away from the probing invader. As the cannula pressed its side, the baby began struggling to turn and twist away. It seemed clear to me that it could feel the cannula, and it did not like what it was feeling. The cannula was already being rotated by the doctor, and now I could see the tiny body violently twisting with it. For the briefest moment the baby looked as if it were being wrung like a dishcloth, twirled and squeezed. And then it crumpled and began disappearing into the cannula before my eyes. The last thing I saw was the tiny, perfectly formed backbone sucked into the tube, and then it was gone. The uterus was empty. Totally empty. And now it hit me like a lightning bolt: What was in this woman’s womb just a moment ago was alive. It wasn’t just tissue, just cells. It was a human baby.”[30]
These were all individuals – doctors, clinics directors, and scientists – who were pro-abortion, yet who could either admit openly that life begins at conception, or who were convinced of that reality through their firsthand experiences with abortion procedures. Intrinsically, we all know this is the case. There is nothing magical about the birth canal. If a baby is a baby once it is born, it had to have always been a baby – a living baby – even before it was born. And if that life began at conception – which medical professionals and scientists can’t deny that it MUST begin at conception – then any decisive steps taken with the intention to end that life, terminate the pregnancy, or rid of the growing baby, cannot be considered anything other than murder.
Life must be protected. If life is valued, treasured, and defended outside of the womb, then how much more ought it be valued, treasured, and defended inside of the womb?
This reality, of life beginning at conception, will shape, MUST shape, all policy decisions made about abortion. If life begins at conception, then there can be no abortion, only attempts to save mother and baby in the event of a tragedy. If life begins at conception, then there are no such thing as reproductive rights – because by the time you are pregnant a life already exists! Your right to choose to have a baby or not is over and done with. If life begins at conception, the question should not be until what point can we legally rid of the child, but rather how can we care for mother and child throughout the pregnancy and after? What options can we extend to her to help her safely deliver her baby and then choose what path to follow from there?
All the legislation in California, all the laws we just discussed, promote the idea that babies are not people before they are born. That they can be discarded, no matter how old, how developed, how viable outside of the womb, or how close they are to being born. That is not legislation that promotes the good. That is not legislation that fulfills the primary duty of government. That is not legislation that restrains evil and seeks righteousness.
Simply put, the abortion policy in California is wicked, and it deeply grieves the heart of God. A state government that does not protect the most innocent, most precious lives under its care is not a government that deserves to be in power. We must be compelled to make change.
What Can We DO About It?
How do we do that? After all, it seems impossible to change in a state that protects abortion in its legal precedent, its state law, AND its state constitution. But no matter the challenge before us, the reasons for opposing abortion and supporting life are too important to give up, or to not even try. Babies are humans. We cannot ever give up on fighting for that basic reality. The first step is to recognize the reality of the situation in front of us. Knowing the history of these laws is important because to create change you have to look plainly at the obstacles in front of you. By being informed, we know that we have to change all three elements discussed in order to begin peeling back the layers of our abortion laws. It isn’t enough to just vaguely know that California is liberal and so it supports abortion – you need to know how. So, in a small way, you have already taken a very important first step.
Then we ask, how do we change those components? The greatest tool for creating change is by swaying public opinion. While public opinion doesn’t change legal precedent, it IS what passes propositions like the ones we saw were passed both a long time ago and recently. Voters are the ones who enshrined the right to privacy in the California constitution, and voters are the ones who, in 2022, passed another constitutional amendment to include the right to abortion specifically. If the will of the people was against this, it wouldn’t have gotten done. But the reality we face is that public opinion in our state is for abortion rights, and so the only way to repeal abortion rights is by informing the people in our communities, cities, and local governments that abortion should be unthinkable.
Unfortunately, pro-abortion sentiment is on the rise, not just in California, but across the country. According to Pew Research Center, as of May 2024 63% of Americans said that abortion should be legal in most or all cases, while only 36% said it should be illegal in all or most cases.[31] Not only is sentiment on the rise, but so is the actual percentage of abortions being performed. The Guttmacher Institute conducted a study that found the national abortion rate increased by 10% from 2020 to 2023, and specifically in California there was a 16% increase in the number of abortions within the same timeframe.[32] This is the highest California’s abortion rate has been in a decade. They also found that 93% of all abortions in California are elective, meaning that it is not medically necessary for the life or health of the mother. Only 0.5% of women sought abortions due to rape, with most women reporting financial struggles, career or education, or simply not wanting to be a mother at the time they were pregnant.[33]
When it comes to public sentiment, why should we focus on changing public opinion? It seems that people have made up their minds, and it is moving in the direction of supporting abortion more and more as time passes. Well, we have to ask, what does the public really know about abortion? A recent NPR survey found that most Americans don’t know basic facts about abortions, facts like when and what viability is for a fetus.[34] Live Action, a large pro-life organization, regularly puts out videos of their volunteers talking to everyday Americans out on the street about what abortion is, and the result of a lot of those conversations are individuals saying they never knew what an abortion actually was, and that in learning more about the actual procedure they either wanted to do more research before reaffirming their pro-choice beliefs, or that their minds were changed on the spot. The national conversation around abortion, and the largest abortion organization Planned Parenthood, have so often diverted away from what abortion is, that women today have no idea what they are signing up for or what they are supporting. Maybe if they knew more about what abortion entailed, just how violent it is in killing a living baby, and how detrimental it is for the woman receiving it, maybe then they would reconsider their pro-abortion sentiments. We have to push back against the narratives with truth – truth that a fetus is a living person, truth that they can feel pain and do suffer during abortion procedures, truth that there are enormous risks to women who receive abortions, and truth that it is not loving to mass dispose of millions of babies per year.
I want us to listen to how the abortion doctor who helped create the procedures used for 96% of all abortions after the first trimester described the technique:
“The [skull] is about the size of a Ping-Pong ball and usually can be grasped readily with the [forceps]. Collapsing it gives a definite sensation... Grasping and collapsing the [skull is] often difficult. Stripping the [skull] of soft tissue is sometimes the first step in successful delivery of this part, followed by dislocation of parietal bones.... long-curved scissors may be necessary to decapitate and dismember the fetus."[35]
I have to believe – have to hope – that if more women heard THAT description, rather than euphemisms like reproductive rights and clump of cells and termination of a pregnancy, that they would think twice about supporting such a barbaric practice.
Beyond changing public opinion, you personally can support the pro-life movement through voting against pro-abortion propositions and laws, making your opposition known to your local and state leaders when they pass these bills, and by supporting initiatives that repeal the horrors of abortion law in our state. You can, and should, also support pregnancy resource centers, who do the hard, unpopular, but necessary and life-saving work of caring for mothers and babies amid unplanned or unwanted pregnancies. These organizations need encouragement and support, especially when they are attacked and ridiculed in California. They also need financial support and volunteer workers. I will link some good organizations and resources in the show notes for you to consider.
The Importance of the Church – and the Gospel
But, with all of that said, there is no greater influence on our culture and for this issue today than the church. The church has great capacity, and responsibility, to change the culture. Going back to the Pew Research Poll I cited earlier, 73% of evangelical Protestants believe abortion should be illegal in all or most cases. That is a vast contrast to religiously unaffiliated Americans, 86% of whom say it should be legal.[36] As Christians, we know that the Bible has much to say on the topic of unborn life. We know that God creates life in the womb, He knows each life before it is even conceived, and He knits together life in the womb. God despises those who attack the vulnerable, and He requires that we defend the defenseless among us. Abortion is not primarily a political issue; abortion is a moral issue. Which means that the authority on the topic is not our political leaders or our government; our authority is God, the Creator and Sustainer of life and the only One qualified to define good versus evil. God hates murder, but He especially hates the murder of children. So, as the church, we MUST be outspoken on this issue, we HAVE to rally together to change the culture around us.
We do that on topical issues like abortion, but at the end of the day we also do that by being faithful witnesses of the Gospel. Because it is only when people come to know and love Christ, when they submit their lives to Him, that they will then desire what He desires and love what He loves. We offer women in desperate situations hope not only by financially and emotionally supporting them, not only by directing them to loving clinics that will help them and not harm them, but by offering them something greater: the love of Christ and the true hope found in Him alone, outside of their circumstances.
So Christian, living in California, take this as your reminder that our state is committing and legalizing great evil, but you serve a God capable of great redemption. Unwavering faith and belief in the Gospel and the redemption that only it can bring is the only foundation for true, lasting change.
References:
[1] Grossi, Giuliana. “Abortion in the Presidential Debate: Trump Defends State Bans, Harris Vows National Protections.” AJMC, September 16, 2024. https://www.ajmc.com/view/abortion-in-the-presidential-debate-trump-defends-state-bans-harris-vows-national-protections.
[2] Flanigan, Aaron. “52nd March for Life Marks New Era of Hope for Pro-Life Movement.” AMAC - the Association of Mature American Citizens, January 27, 2025. https://amac.us/newsline/society/52nd-march-for-life-marks-new-era-of-hope-for-pro-life-movement/#:~:text=This%20past%20Friday%2C%20just%20as,the%20annual%20March%20for%20Life.
[3] Jensen, Kurt. “Trump Pardons 23 Pro-life Activists Convicted of FACE Act Violations.” National Catholic Reporter, January 24, 2025. https://www.ncronline.org/news/trump-pardons-23-pro-life-activists-convicted-face-act-violations.
[4] Congress.gov. “H.R.26 - Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act,” January 11, 2023. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/26.
[5] Choi, Joseph. “Senate Democrats Block GOP’s ‘Born-Alive’ Abortion Bill.” The Hill, January 22, 2025. https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5100557-senate-abortion-bill-born-alive/.
[6] Pender, Caelyn. “From Illegal to Haven State: How CA Abortion Laws Have Changed From 1850 to Today.” KRON 4, July 8, 2022. https://www.kron4.com/news/from-illegal-to-haven-state-how-ca-abortion-laws-have-changed-from-1850-to-today/.
[7] Benson Gold, Rachel. “Lessons From Before Roe: Will Past Be Prologue?” Special Analysis. The Guttmacher Institute, March 2003. https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/article_files/gr060108.pdf.
[8] The New York Times. “Reagan Affirms Anti‐Abortion Stand,” February 8, 1976. https://www.nytimes.com/1976/02/08/archives/reagan-affirms-antiabortion-stand.html.
[9] Gintis, Haley. “People v. Belous.” Quimbee, n.d. https://www.quimbee.com/cases/people-v-belous.
[10] ACLU of Southern California. “Leading the Way, the California Way,” July 5, 2023. https://www.aclusocal.org/en/news/leading-way-california-way#:~:text=In%201969%2C%20our%20state's%20highest,nationwide%20from%201973%20to%202022.
[11] Ballotpedia. “California Proposition 11, Constitutional Right to Privacy Amendment (1972) - Ballotpedia,” n.d. https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_11,_Constitutional_Right_to_Privacy_Amendment_(1972)#:~:text=California%20Proposition%2011%2C%20Constitutional%20Right%20to%20Privacy%20Amendment%20(1972),-From%20Ballotpedia&text=California%20Proposition%2011%20was%20on,a%20state%20right%20to%20privacy.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Supreme Court of California. “Committee to Defend Reproductive Rights V. Myers.” Justia Law, March 20, 1981. https://law.justia.com/cases/california/supreme-court/3d/29/252.html.
[14] “Reagan Affirms Anti‐Abortion Stand.”
[15] ACLU of Southern California. “New California Law Protects and Expands Women’s Right to Choose,” September 5, 2002. https://www.aclusocal.org/en/news/new-california-law-protects-and-expands-womens-right-choose.
[16] Legislative Analyst’s Office. “Proposition 1 [Ballot],” November 8, 2022. https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Proposition?number=1&year=2022.
[17] Ballotpedia. “California Proposition 1, Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment (2022) - Ballotpedia,” n.d. https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_1,_Right_to_Reproductive_Freedom_Amendment_(2022).
[18] California Legislative Information. “Bill Text - SB-345 Health Care Services: Legally Protected Health Care Activities.,” September 27, 2023. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB345.
[19] Birnbaum, Natalie. “AHLA - SB 345: California’s Abortion Shield Law and the Potential Impact on Medication Abortion Access Nationwide.” Health Law Weekly, September 29, 2023. https://www.americanhealthlaw.org/content-library/health-law-weekly/article/cfecb23f-5083-42f7-aa64-f76629905a5d/sb-345-california-s-abortion-shield-law-and-the-po#:~:text=S.B.,protected%20care%20under%20SB%20345.
[20] Liberty Counsel. “U.S. States Defending Human Life in the Womb,” January 14, 2025. Pg. 12. https://lc.org/PDFs/States_Protecting_Against_Abortion_011425-B.pdf.
[21] Ibid.
[22] Reuters Fact Check. “Fact Check: California Reproductive Health Bill Leads to Misinterpretation Online.” Reuters, April 6, 2022. https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-california-law-idUSL2N2W30U8/.
[23] California Legislative Information, “Today’s Law as Amended - AB-2223 Reproductive Health.,” November 18, 2022, https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2223&showamends=false.
[24] California Legislative Information, “California Code, HSC 123435,” 1995, https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=HSC§ionNum=123435.
[25] Family Research Council. “Pro-Life Laws in the States,” n.d. https://www.frc.org/prolifemaps#gsc.tab=0.
[26] Terzo, Sarah. “Former Planned Parenthood Abortionist: Life Begins at Conception.” Live Action News, September 7, 2016. https://www.liveaction.org/news/former-abortionist-life-begins-conception-preborn-feel-pain/.
[27] Knapton, Sarah. “Bright Flash of Light Marks Incredible Moment Life Begins When Sperm Meets Egg.” The Telegraph, August 24, 2018. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/04/26/bright-flash-of-light-marks-incredible-moment-life-begins-when-s/.
[28] American College of Pediatricians, Fred De Miranda, and Patricia Lee June. “When Human Life Begins,” March 2017. https://acpeds.org/position-statements/when-human-life-begins.
[29] Ertelt, Steven. “Seeing a Baby on Ultrasound Made Abortionist Quit, Become Pro-Life - LifeNews.com.” LifeNews.com, July 30, 2013. https://www.lifenews.com/2013/07/29/seeing-a-baby-on-ultrasound-made-abortionist-quit-become-pro-life/.
[30] Johnson, Abby. Unplanned: The Dramatic True Story of a Former Planned Parenthood Leader’s Eye-Opening Journey across the Lifeline. Chapter 1. Tyndale House, 2014.
[31] Mitchell, Travis. “Public Opinion on Abortion.” Pew Research Center, September 4, 2024. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/.
[32] Hwang, Kristen. “Abortion in California: Creating the Easiest Access in the US - CalMatters.” CalMatters, March 27, 2024. https://calmatters.org/explainers/abortion-in-california-laws/#:~:text=The%20Guttmacher%20Institute%20estimates%20a%2010%%20increase,provided%20in%20California%20over%20the%20same%20timeframe.
[33] Desantis Campaign. “Fact Sheet: Abortion in California Under Gavin Newsom.” The American Presidency Project, November 30, 2023. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/desantis-campaign-press-release-fact-sheet-abortion-california-under-gavin-newsom#:~:text=Statistics%20on%20abortion%20in%20California%20*%20According,and%20not%20being%20ready%20for%20a%20child.
[34] Benshoff, Laura. “Many Americans Don’t Know Basic Abortion Facts. Test Your Knowledge.” NPR, January 26, 2023. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/01/26/1150346927/many-americans-dont-know-basic-abortion-facts-test-your-knowledge.
[35] Ron Desantis Campaign, “Fact Sheet: Abortion in California Under Gavin Newsom.”
[36] Mitchell, “Public Opinion on Abortion.”
