The post-Dobbs challenge for pro-lifers

As a result of the 2024 general election, the State of Missouri was transformed from one of the safest states in America for the unborn to one of the most dangerous. Seemingly overnight, Missouri went from being an abolitionist state to an abortionist state. Due to the passage of a citizen-led ballot measure that enshrines abortion as a constitutional right, more than 170 Missouri laws protecting unborn children and pregnant women are currently in the legal process of becoming annulled.

The political game to codify a right to abortion played out in Missouri similar to other states since the fall of Roe v. Wade. A citizen-led ballot petition was initiated, followed by a dramatic influx of out-of-state money to pay signature gatherers and fund political advertising that manipulated voters through sloganeering (e.g., referring to abortion as a “reproductive right”) and disordered empathy. Through such big-money blitz campaigns, local efforts were drowned out, being drastically outspent by at least six to one.

Regrettably, too few of Missouri’s Republican elected leaders used their bully pulpit to rally their base to turn out and stand up for life in the face of a constitutional amendment that promises abortion on demand. Missourians noticed this failure of leadership most pronouncedly at the office of the state’s governor, whose lack of engagement stood in stark contrast to Florida, where Governor Ron DeSantis led the charge against such a measure, helping to prevent his state from becoming another casualty of the post-Roe, pro-abortion ballot petition strategy of the political left.

Yet, despite the abundance of out-of-state money and lack of pro-life leadership among Missouri’s top political class, the measure passed by only 1.6 percent—very narrowly clearing the simple majority threshold required. And had Republicans been able to change the standard needed to pass a ballot petition earlier in the year to a require a concurrent majority, the initiative would have had no chance. Clearly, the pro-abortion contingent in Missouri cannot take their narrow victory, riding on the backs of out-of-state financiers, as a definitive mandate for Missouri.

Nevertheless, the amendment did pass, which currently threatens to invalidate Missouri’s laws protecting unborn children and their mothers. This change has initiated the ongoing debate within pro-life ranks regarding how to move forward. As one side argues that the only moral choice is to put forward a constitutional amendment with full protections for the unborn, the other side is willing to use incremental amendments and laws to save as many innocent lives as possible on the road to full protection for the unborn.

While the debate is important and will continue, Missouri’s legislators ultimately chose the latter option (despite the efforts of many conservative legislators to abolish abortion completely). And their “incremental” constitutional amendment is set to go before voters sometime later this year. (The governor will decide whether it will appear on the August primary ballot or be delayed to the November general election). Their proposed amendment (2026) eliminates the previously adopted amendment (2024) that legalizes abortion on demand, and replaces it with an abortion ban with exceptions “in cases of medical emergency, fetal anomaly, rape or incest.” And in the case of rape or incest, abortions may only occur in the first 12 weeks. Additionally, the amendment empowers the legislature to regulate the health and safety standards of clinics that offer abortion—regulations which have historically proven in Missouri to drastically limit the number of abortion providers, and therefore abortions.

So how should Christians in Missouri vote? Should they vote no or sit out the election because the law does not go far enough to protect the God-given rights of the unborn? Or should they vote yes to prevent abortion on demand and save as many lives as possible? I want to humbly plead with my fellow Christians and Missourians to take the latter approach, and to vote yes on Amendment 3 when the time comes.

We should make our decision with a clear understanding of the reality on the ground. The current constitution considers abortion a “fundamental right,” with protections that will make it nearly impossible for legislators to regulate. This scenario will ultimately lead to widespread, easy access to abortion with little to no safety standards for mothers. In other words, voting no will lead to more children being murdered in environments that do not meet basic health and safety regulations.

Voting yes, on the other hand, will drastically reduce the number of abortions legally possible and allow the legislature to regulate abortion to ensure the health and safety of mothers—which will further limit abortion access. It will also protect pregnant minors by requiring their consent as well as the consent of her parent or legal guardian.

Missourians, therefore, have a choice of unfettered abortion or strong (though not complete) restrictions that will minimize legal opportunities to obtain one. While Amendment 3 does not itself meet the biblical ideal, it does bring Missouri into much stronger conformity to God’s law and sets the stage for full abolition. And in so doing, its codification will save the lives of countless children.

Thus, I concur with my fellow Missouri Baptists who believe we “cannot stand by and watch innocent babies lose their lives to the horrendous act of abortion; rather, we must take action to save those we can now and fight to save all babies.” Amendment 3 represents such action, allowing us to save “every life providentially possible.” I pray that we will.