When “Pro-Life” Isn’t Enough: Why the Church Must Reclaim the Conversation

New Gallup data reveals what many church leaders sense but rarely articulate clearly: Americans are deeply conflicted about abortion, and even those who identify as “pro-life” often hold views that allow for most abortions to continue. While political labels and polling categories dominate the conversation, the data exposes a deeper problem. The term pro-life has become so elastic that it no longer clearly reflects a commitment to protecting life at every stage.

In this CareCast conversation, Roland Warren and Vincent DiCaro argue that the real issue is not polling shifts or party platforms, but who gets to define what pro-life actually means. When abortion is framed primarily as a political issue, positions change with election cycles. But, when life is framed through a biblical lens rooted in the image of God, the standard does not move. The church, they contend, must step back into its rightful role not as a political echo, but as a moral and spiritual leader offering a Pro Abundant Life vision.

3 Takeaways from this CareCast Conversation

#1 The Definition Problem: “Pro-Life” Means Different Things to Different People

The data shows a striking contradiction. Large majorities of conservatives, Republicans, and church attenders identify as pro-life, yet only a small fraction believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. That disconnect reveals a fundamental issue: the label pro-life is often detached from the lived reality of unborn children. When limits like 15-week or 20-week bans are described as pro-life, the vast majority of abortions still remain untouched. From the child’s perspective, those distinctions offer little protection. The conversation presses listeners to reconsider whether political compromise has quietly replaced moral clarity.

#2 Politics Are Fragile; Biblical Truth Is Not

Political platforms shift quickly, sometimes dramatically. What one party defends in one election cycle can be redefined or abandoned in the next. The speakers contrast this instability with a biblical worldview that grounds human worth in God’s unchanging character. When life is measured by circumstances such as timing, health, or conception, humanity becomes conditional. History shows where that thinking leads. A Pro Abundant Life framework, rooted in Scripture rather than strategy, provides a durable foundation that does not bend with cultural pressure.

#3 The Church’s Silence Leaves the Podium Unchallenged

One of the most sobering insights is that many churchgoers hold pro-choice views not because Scripture supports them, but because the church has failed to speak clearly and act compassionately. When pastors avoid the issue out of fear of appearing political, the cultural narrative goes unanswered. The podium speaks loudly while the pulpit remains quiet. The result is predictable: believers absorb the worldview of the culture. The speakers argue that reclaiming the conversation requires both truth from the pulpit and tangible support for women, men, and families through the local church.