Standing for Life: Q&A with Pro-Life Apologist Stephanie Gray Connors

Q&A with Stephanie Gray Connors

Q: When you share your pro-life beliefs, you most often employ the art of storytelling and the Socratic method. Why these two approaches?

Stephanie: When I was 18, I met an American named Scott Klusendorf who was invited to speak at a conference for pro-life college students in Canada. Scott worked with a Christian apologetics organization called Stand to Reason, and he quickly became a mentor to a kid who was serious about becoming more involved in the pro-life movement. Over time, Scott helped me see how I could use my particular skill set and talents in pro-life apologetics. He taught me that a good ambassador has knowledge, wisdom, and character—and he especially emphasized the value of storytelling, that articulating your point through the lens of a story makes a concept easier to embrace.

I’ve now spent twenty-two years teaching and forming pro-life apologetic arguments. The concept of being Socratic was something that came after several years of dialoging with others. The more I had conversations and began asking questions—for example, “Why do you believe that?”—is when I really started to find my work and encounters more fruitful.

Socratic method [noun]: the use of questions, as employed by Socrates, to develop a latent idea, as in the mind of a pupil, or to elicit admissions, as from an opponent, tending to establish a proposition. (Definition from dictionary.com)

Q: What is the most common “I’m pro-life, but…” comment you’ve heard over the years, and how do you respond?

Stephanie: There are some people who call themselves pro-life except in situations of rape and sexual assault because the woman who is victimized did not consent to the sex. Their argument is that because the woman is a victim of a crime, she should be allowed to have an abortion.

In this case, I agree on many levels—the woman is a victim, she did endure something horrible, and facing an unexpected pregnancy can be terrifying. But, in response, I always ask these questions: Would having an abortion take away the trauma and nightmares? Is it fair to give the death penalty to the innocent child? 

Q: What about the most common pro-choice argument you hear and your response?

Stephanie: Situations regarding rape are most common, but so is the situation of the woman’s life being in danger—that if a woman is going to die, she should have the right to abort her child. To this argument, I again agree that the situation is tragic, but here I ask another question: Is killing her pre-born child the only solution to saving the mother?

In situations such as this, the solution is to intervene in such a way as to value both the mother and the child and to not directly kill. In doing so, any intervention is often like taking a detour when driving your normal route home. If you see a “road closed” sign, you still get home, albeit a different way. So, too, when a pregnant woman’s life is in danger, you can get to the “home” of saving her life, but the means of abortion—directly killing her child—is like a “road closed” sign. In other words, that option is not ethical and should not be pursued. One can “take a detour” and opt for a different treatment plan that doesn’t include taking the life of her child. I certainly do not object to intervening on the mother’s behalf, but I object to the method of intervention that is often prescribed: abortion.

Q: You’ve participated in hundreds of debates with well-known abortion doctors, prominent pro-choice leaders, and professors. What is it like debating such individuals?

Stephanie: Yes, I’ve debated a lot of people—but in debating abortionists, I am coming face to face with the people who spend their days dismembering and decapitating babies. It’s strange and surreal to shake the hand of a man or woman who just used those hands to kill a child, but I have come to realize that in debating these men and women, I also have a unique opportunity to have personal encounters with people who are so totally opposed to what I do.

Years ago, I felt the Holy Spirit convict me to reach out to my opponents and ask if they would like to have coffee before our debates. The one rule I always ask they abide by is that while we meet for coffee we don’t discuss abortion, because that’s what our debates are for. Remarkably, every professor and abortionist I’ve debated thought this was a brilliant idea and agreed to get together (barring scheduling conflicts). For me, these pre-debate coffee meetings are one more opportunity to evangelize. Pro-lifers are sometimes (and unfairly) portrayed as angry and violent and vicious, but it’s my hope that through these one-on-one meetings, they see the real side of the pro-life movement—and that we get to know each other as human beings and not just as opponents or as stereotypes of our positions and beliefs. In debating, however, I am tough and consistent, because while we are called to respect people, we must not feel compelled to respect bad arguments.

Coming from a background of faith, I draw heavily on the Holy Spirit for the right words and disposition. I can certainly hate what someone does, but I also know that Jesus died for the abortionist just as He died for me. Throughout Scripture, we read of men and women who committed all kinds of sin, yet Jesus shows them mercy. And so I pray for eyes to see my opponents as God sees them.

Q: Were you ever taken by surprise during a debate?

Stephanie: Yes! My debate with Dr. Fraser Fellows, a late-term abortionist in Canada, was my first debate in front of a group of medical students. The whole time, I kept thinking that while I’m trying to reach these students, Dr. Fellows is potentially trying to recruit them. I delivered my remarks, and then it was Dr. Fellows’ turn. I’ll never forget what he said first, which was, “Huh, that was really good. I’m impressed. That was really good.” I remember being absolutely stunned. His comment was a pleasant surprise.

Another time, I was debating a philosophy professor who had an argument for which I didn’t have an immediate response. Essentially, his argument was that just as a parent cannot be mandated to give their living child their kidney, a woman should not be mandated to give her uterus to a pre-born child. I remember thinking in the moments following his argument, “I don’t know what to say!” I ended up responding by asking, “What is the nature and purpose of the kidney versus the nature and purpose of the uterus?” I then explained that the kidneys exist in a person’s body for that person’s body, whereas the uterus is different. The uterus exists in my body, but every single month it gets ready for someone else’s body. The uterus exists more for my offspring than for me, and therefore they may claim a “right” to it in a way my offspring may not claim a right to my kidney.

Later, I heard through the grapevine that this professor admitted to his class the next day that he was up all night trying to think of a response to my response. I’d say that was a negative experience that turned into a positive. It’s also an example of God’s faithfulness. Because in those moments, when I didn’t know what to say, I prayed for the right words, and the Holy Spirit came through! 

It sounds like your faith plays a big role in what you do and how you do it.

Yes, absolutely. Along with being raised in a pro-life home, I was raised in a Catholic Christian home where Christ was the center. I was taught, and shown by example, to walk the talk. My parents instilled in my sister and me the responsibility we have to be Christ’s hands and feet, and that has been the foundation for my activism. I am a creature, not the Creator—and I strive for all my pro-life work to be done through the lens of me being an instrument of God.

Q: Can you share more about the circumstances that led you to become a pro-life advocate?

Stephanie: Pro-life work was a normal part of my growing up—it was a family affair, and that laid a foundation. My parents married in 1977, around the time the pro-life movement started in Canada and the United States. When I was born in 1980, my parents moved to a suburb of Vancouver and got involved with a local pregnancy center and pro-life center. My dad would often go with my mom to conferences, and my sister and I would go along with her to visit pregnant women and new mothers in the hospital.

And so, I became that kid—an extroverted, convicted, and passionate twelve-year-old who wrote letters to politicians and leaders. To this day, I have thick stacks of copies of letters I wrote and even a few responses too. Then, in my university years, I did pro-life activism through a club. Professionally, I was the executive director and co-founder of the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform for more than a decade before I began my ministry, Love Unleashes Life, in 2014.

Q: What would you say are some of the major pro-life victories in the past decade?

Stephanie: At a very practical level, the major victories are the mothers who are about to kill their pre-born children and instead choose life, not death. My experiences and area of expertise are in the education arm of the pro-life movement, and time and again—through my work and that of my peers, through teaching and speaking opportunities, and staffing exhibits on college campuses—I see people change their minds from pro-choice to pro-life. To me, each one of those changed minds is a victory.

As I follow what goes on in the United States, I see the heartbeat bills that are passed at the state level. These, too, are victories as some states create laws that narrow access to abortion. However, often times, these state laws exclude cases of rape, the woman’s life being in danger, etc. And so there is more work to be done to protect every pre-born life.

Q: So do you think government should be involved in abortion? What are your thoughts on whether it’s important to elect pro-life leaders? 

Stephanie: It’s very important that the pro-life movement realizes we need a wholistic approach. In Scripture, we learn that the body has many parts, but they all work together. Similarly, the pro-life movement has several parts, and we need them all: the pastoral (helping women in crises); the educational (proclaiming the truth and trying to reach hearts and minds at the grassroots level); and the political (working for public policy). While I believe the skill set and gifts I have best serve the educational arm, I always say that the law should absolutely reflect what is true and right.

“In Scripture, we learn that the body has many parts, but they all work together. Similarly, the pro-life movement has several parts, and we need them all.“ —Stephanie Gray Connors

A civil society is determined by how it treats its most vulnerable, namely the pre-born children who can’t run away from the abortionists’ instruments. As citizens, we expect our governments to step in—and our laws to be implemented—to label injustices as crimes so that they’re not only unlawful but also met with consequences. We expect our governments to step in and protect innocent victims of rape, and so we should also expect our governments to step in and protect the innocent lives inside the womb. Our laws should reflect pro-life sentiment, and so I do believe we have a responsibility to support pro-life politicians and legislation.

Q: What are some ways someone can become a more active player in the pro-life movement? (Because it could be easy to say, “I’m not experienced in this area like Stephanie, so what could I do?”)

Stephanie: The starting place is prayer, asking the Holy Spirit for an open heart to follow the promptings of where He is leading. Then, personal study—whether it’s reading a book like mine (Love Unleashes Life: Abortion and the Art of Communicating Truth), Scott Klusendorf’s book (Pro-Life 101: A Step-by-Step Guide to Making Your Case Persuasively), or other resources—to become well-informed on pro-life perspectives. 

Eventually, actively seek out opportunities to have conversations with colleagues, friends, or family members. From there, you can do an inventory of your current commitments as well as your talents and interests that could compliment the pro-life movement. If you have a counselor’s heart, are a good listener, and have the gift of empathy, perhaps you could consider volunteering at a pregnancy center. If you’re more of the activist type or a debater, you can visit college campuses to engage with college students at pro-life exhibits. If the political realm appeals to you, consider working or volunteering for pro-life politicians to help get them elected. Ultimately, instead of saying, “I don’t have your gifts,” take a look at what your gifts are and how they can serve the pro-life movement.

Q: Do you think the day will come when abortion is no more?

Stephanie: I do! I just don’t know when that day will be. When I dive deep into historical injustices—child labor, slavery, the fight for civil rights—I remember thinking that with abortion humans are still attacking humans, they are just now attacking the youngest among us. Unfortunately, since the fall of mankind in the Garden of Eden, humans have a tendency to underestimate one another and our value as the image bearer—as people who bear the image of God.

We can look back at history at the time when William Wilberforce—a prominent British politician and abolitionist in the late 1700s to early 1800s—saw the day when the slave trade and slavery was ended. So, yes, I think the day will come when abortion is no more. Until that day comes, it’s our role and responsibility to be defenders. But as history as taught us, we also need to be on alert for what new group will come under attack. Once the youngest among us is protected, what new victim group will come under attack?

Q: What encouraging words do you have for those praying for and actively working toward the day when abortion is no more?

Stephanie: With God, all things are possible. As we look to the reality of close to one million abortions every year in United States and almost 100,000 every year in Canada, it can be hard to think how this is ever going to end. But God is in control. He, in His time, will ensure that the dignity of every human life is upheld and respected. All we can control is what we do in response to what is happening in our world. We can’t control other people and their reactions, but we can control what we do. We know it’s not good to be a bystander or even a persecutor. So be a defender and leave the results up to God.

One of my favorite quotes is from an author, historian, and minister named Edward Everett Hale, who said this: “I am only one; but still I am one. I cannot do everything, but still I can do something. And because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do the something I can do.”

We can’t do everything, but just because we can’t save every single child doesn’t mean we can’t save the one or the some. So, why not do the little bit we can do?