How infertility gave me the gift of compassion about abortion

March 29, 2019

jencu/Flickr

Writer

I never thought I'd have any compassion or understanding for someone who has had an abortion.

The thought of killing a developing baby so offended everything in me, it was virtually impossible to imagine a scenario where I could ever get past it — especially the longer our battle with infertility dragged on. Wherever I go, I always seem to make friends with the atheists, the liberals and the outsiders, but I've never made room for those who fight on the side of abortion.

My wife Jennie and I have found a way to have joy and love despite the baby-shaped hole in our hearts, but we really do feel empty inside at times. And seeing that empty look in my loving wife's eyes was almost too much to bear. I've dealt with physical pain my whole life and I can handle a lot. What forced me to me knees day after day and night after night, however, was seeing my beautiful wife try to be strong for me.

Who doesn't love a good concert?Photo credit: Jon Boldt

I know we don't get everything we want in life, but the 14-year rollercoaster of infertility has been gut-wrenchingly painful, and not something I would wish on my worst enemy. Jennie is my best friend, and while I know the fires of life we have endured have forged a bond that will never be broken, it doesn't make it any easier — and man, do those fires get hot!

Some little boys dream of being an astronaut, some an athlete. Not me. All I ever wanted to be was a dad. Whether it was how to throw a baseball, how to cook the perfect steak or how to drive, I dreamt of the day I would be the one passing knowledge on to a little boy of my own.

I am the oldest of seven and I have three sisters, and the way they looked at my dad made me want to have a little girl of my own — I couldn't wait to be wrapped around her little finger. Just thinking of that now brings a tear to my eye and has me more determined than ever to not give up.

We just spent the last year consulting with more fertility specialists and trying different treatments, and ultimately, IVF. We found out a few weeks ago that our embryo that was created and transferred did not take, and the pregnancy never even got off the ground.

We had been so hopeful and thought for sure this was the time it would work. Needless to say, we were crushed. I tried to pick up the pieces as quickly as possible so I could be there for her, and I did, but it wasn't easy. Now we are facing what could be our final shot (unless we win the Powerball or something).

This is the moment we thought all our dreams came true.Photo credit: Jon Boldt

Throughout this process, I can't help but think of all the unwanted pregnancies versus how many people are struggling with infertility. It really started to upset me thinking about all the drug addicts and teenagers who were, as Barack Obama said, "punished with a baby." I found myself becoming angry, bitter and resentful.

Just a quick glance at the numbers is enough to make your head explode.

In 2017, there were about 880,000 abortions. At any given time, about 10 percent of women between the ages of 15-44 struggle to conceive — that is 6.1 million in total. Think about that. There are enough women who want to have a baby but can't to adopt the number of aborted babies nearly 7 times over. The cost of adoption is a whole other can of worms I won't get into, but if we could reform adoption, we could all but eliminate the need for any abortions.

Over the past couple of months, I've lost count of the number of shots I've administered to my wife. First, it was the hormones to aid in the egg retrieval process, and then it was to help the embryo to implant and continue to grow. Over that period of time, I was excited and hopeful, yet the nagging feelings of resentment wouldn't pass.

You don't want to know how much money is in this picture!Photo credit: Jon Boldt

I knew the only way to get over these feelings was through prayer and the power of the Atonement of Jesus Christ, so I went to work. I didn't want to be angry anymore. I wanted to enjoy the process of getting pregnant, so I hit my knees. The thoughts came slowly at first, and one was something Glenn shared that might not seem like it correlates at first, but bear with me.

This is what he said:

Hate is not the opposite of love, apathy is.

Here's the meaning: hate and love operate based on the same emotions and engagement — but with different goals and outcomes. What kills love is not hate, it's apathy. And this inspired me to come up with a solution. I felt like I couldn't overcome this without putting together a path forward, and this quote hit me like a bolt of lightning.

We don't stand much of a chance on changing the minds of the militant left, and they don't stand much of a chance of changing the minds of pro-lifers. The battle lies in the mushy middle where apathy has a stranglehold. Apathy is the enemy to both pro-life and pro-choice advocates — whoever wins that battle wins the war.

So many people say they would never have an abortion, but they support someone else's right to choose. That's the group we need to connect with. The upcoming movie, Unplanned, is one way we can pierce their hearts and open their minds to see the evil abortion truly is. We must do this all without judgement in our hearts, and instead, act with love and compassion.

We need to separate the real people from the organizations: Planned Parenthood and the politicians who have pushed this agenda so far that we are now debating whether or not it's ok to kill a baby after it's born. I can't believe this is where we are. This agenda is pure evil and we must take a stand.

The deeper I've thought and prayed about this subject, the more I feel relieved of the burden to judge anyone for any reason.

It is beyond me to understand what's going through the mind of a teenage girl who thinks her life is over when she finds out she's pregnant. Likewise, the pain of a sexual assault is something I cannot begin to fathom, and compounding that with a pregnancy is a decision I have no room to judge. The deeper I've thought and prayed about this subject, the more I feel relieved of the burden to judge anyone for any reason. We will all be held to account for what we've made of the life granted to us by our Creator, but we are not meant to be the judge.

It's time to throw winning and losing out the window along with all the tactics that have failed completely. We cannot change hearts and minds if all we are trying to do is change the scoreboard. This issue is about people, love and compassion — and loving someone doesn't include keeping score.

I believe there are four ways we can change our behavior in order to achieve different results. But the key is making these a part of us, not a tool to get what we want. Here are the four behaviors :

FORGIVE: We must forgive those who have chosen to abort. It's not only the compassionate thing to do, it's what is required of us by our Savior, Jesus Christ. Plus, forgiveness always edifies and uplifts all parties, allowing reconciliation to happen.

LOVE: Find ways to show love to those who have already made this choice as well as those who are now facing this decision.

STRENGTHEN: Strengthen those who are in this situation and educate them on all the options available to them. So many times the choice seems to be either "ruin your life" or "abort." There are so many other options, and education is key.

STAND: Take a stand, and don't let the forces of darkness win. Refuse to give in, and help people shake the apathy from their slumbering eyes.

Politically, the focus needs to be on waking the sleeping masses, because the left and the abortion racket do not have the polls in their favor. By and large, people tolerate abortion to a certain point, but very few actually embrace the choice, and, in fact, a lot of those who have had abortions deeply regret it.

The trial my wife and I are facing isn't entirely unlike that of a woman who is facing an unplanned pregnancy. Both have options and choices, both involve the creation of another life and both have eternal consequences. Apathy would convince my wife and me to give up trying and enjoy a life of traveling, doing fun things and getting a good night's sleep. It also would convince the unintentionally pregnant woman that her choice doesn't really matter in the long run — it's just a clump of cells that she can get rid of and forget.

We must fight apathy with all we have in us, no matter the issue. Let's put down our cell phones and turn off Netflix once in a while, and live life.

We must fight apathy with all we have in us. Let's put down our cell phones and turn off Netflix once in a while, and live life. If we can combine being pro-life with pro-choices, meaning educate and give more options, I believe more will choose life.

This time around, we'll be transferring two frozen embryos and the doctor says the odds are good at least one will take — and it's 50/50 we'll end up with twins. Who knows? Maybe our dreams will come true this round. Or maybe we will continue to be our nieces' and nephews' favorite aunt and uncle while we explore other options.

No matter what happens, I know love and life are most important, and I will defend both with every ounce of strength God will grant me. I will gladly stand shoulder to shoulder with any and all who will join me.

Even if you've had an abortion.

GLENN

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

BLOG

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

GLENN

The dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

POLL: Is America’s next generation trading freedom for equity?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Do you think the Gen Z support for Trump is an opportunity for conservatives to win them over with anti-establishment reforms that preserve liberty?

Americans expose Supreme Court’s flag ruling as a failed relic

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

In a nation where the Stars and Stripes symbolize the blood-soaked sacrifices of our heroes, President Trump's executive order to crack down on flag desecration amid violent protests has ignited fierce debate. But in a recent poll, Glenn asked the tough question: Can Trump protect the Flag without TRAMPLING free speech? Glenn asked, and you answered—thousands weighed in on this pressing clash between free speech and sacred symbols.

The results paint a picture of resounding distrust toward institutional leniency. A staggering 85% of respondents support banning the burning of American flags when it incites violence or disturbs the peace, a bold rejection of the chaos we've seen from George Floyd riots to pro-Palestinian torchings. Meanwhile, 90% insist that protections for burning other flags—like Pride or foreign banners—should not be treated the same as Old Glory under the First Amendment, exposing the hypocrisy in equating our nation's emblem with fleeting symbols. And 82% believe the Supreme Court's Texas v. Johnson ruling, shielding flag burning as "symbolic speech," should not stand without revision—can the official story survive such resounding doubt from everyday Americans weary of government inaction?

Your verdict sends a thunderous message: In this divided era, the flag demands defense against those who exploit freedoms to sow disorder, without trampling the liberties it represents. It's a catastrophic failure of the establishment to ignore this groundswell.

Want to make your voice heard? Check out more polls HERE.

Labor Day EXPOSED: The Marxist roots you weren’t told about

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

During your time off this holiday, remember the man who started it: Peter J. McGuire, a racist Marxist who co-founded America’s first socialist party.

Labor Day didn’t begin as a noble tribute to American workers. It began as a negotiation with ideological terrorists.

In the late 1800s, factory and mine conditions were brutal. Workers endured 12-to-15-hour days, often seven days a week, in filthy, dangerous environments. Wages were low, injuries went uncompensated, and benefits didn’t exist. Out of desperation, Americans turned to labor unions. Basic protections had to be fought for because none were guaranteed.

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

That era marked a seismic shift — much like today. The Industrial Revolution, like our current digital and political upheaval, left millions behind. And wherever people get left behind, Marxists see an opening.

A revolutionary wedge

This was Marxism’s moment.

Economic suffering created fertile ground for revolutionary agitation. Marxists, socialists, and anarchists stepped in to stoke class resentment. Their goal was to turn the downtrodden into a revolutionary class, tear down the existing system, and redistribute wealth by force.

Among the most influential agitators was Peter J. McGuire, a devout Irish Marxist from New York. In 1874, he co-founded the Social Democratic Workingmens Party of North America, the first Marxist political party in the United States. He was also a vice president of the American Federation of Labor, which would become the most powerful union in America.

McGuire’s mission wasn’t hidden. He wanted to transform the U.S. into a socialist nation through labor unions.

That mission soon found a useful symbol.

In the 1880s, labor leaders in Toronto invited McGuire to attend their annual labor festival. Inspired, he returned to New York and launched a similar parade on Sept. 5 — chosen because it fell halfway between Independence Day and Thanksgiving.

The first parade drew over 30,000 marchers who skipped work to hear speeches about eight-hour workdays and the alleged promise of Marxism. The parade caught on across the country.

Negotiating with radicals

By 1894, Labor Day had been adopted by 30 states. But the federal government had yet to make it a national holiday. A major strike changed everything.

In Pullman, Illinois, home of the Pullman railroad car company, tensions exploded. The economy tanked. George Pullman laid off hundreds of workers and slashed wages for those who remained — yet refused to lower the rent on company-owned homes.

That injustice opened the door for Marxist agitators to mobilize.

Sympathetic railroad workers joined the strike. Riots broke out. Hundreds of railcars were torched. Mail service was disrupted. The nation’s rail system ground to a halt.

President Grover Cleveland — under pressure in a midterm election year — panicked. He sent 12,000 federal troops to Chicago. Two strikers were killed in the resulting clashes.

With the crisis spiraling and Democrats desperate to avoid political fallout, Cleveland struck a deal. Within six days of breaking the strike, Congress rushed through legislation making Labor Day a federal holiday.

It was the first of many concessions Democrats would make to organized labor in exchange for political power.

What we really celebrated

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

Kean Collection / Staff | Getty Images

What we celebrated was a Canadian idea, brought to America by the founder of the American Socialist Party, endorsed by racially exclusionary unions, and made law by a president and Congress eager to save face.

It was the first of many bones thrown by the Democratic Party to union power brokers. And it marked the beginning of a long, costly compromise with ideologues who wanted to dismantle the American way of life — from the inside out.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Durham annex EXPOSES Soros, Pentagon ties to Deep State machine

ullstein bild Dtl. / Contributor | Getty Images

The Durham annex and ODNI report documents expose a vast network of funders and fixers — from Soros’ Open Society Foundations to the Pentagon.

In a column earlier this month, I argued the deep state is no longer deniable, thanks to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. I outlined the structural design of the deep state as revealed by two recent declassifications: Gabbard’s ODNI report and the Durham annex released by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).

These documents expose a transnational apparatus of intelligence agencies, media platforms, think tanks, and NGOs operating as a parallel government.

The deep state is funded by elite donors, shielded by bureaucracies, and perpetuated by operatives who drift between public office and private influence without accountability.

But institutions are only part of the story. This web of influence is made possible by people — and by money. This follow-up to the first piece traces the key operatives and financial networks fueling the deep state’s most consequential manipulations, including the Trump-Russia collusion hoax.

Architects and operatives

At the top of the intelligence pyramid sits John Brennan, President Obama’s CIA director and one of the principal architects of the manipulated 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. James Clapper, who served as director of national intelligence, signed off on that same ICA and later joined 50 other former officials in concluding the Hunter Biden laptop had “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation” ahead of the 2020 election. The timing, once again, served a political objective.

James Comey, then FBI director, presided over Crossfire Hurricane. According to the Durham annex, he also allowed the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server to collapse after it became entangled with “sensitive intelligence” revealing her plan to tie President Donald Trump to Russia.

That plan, as documented in the annex, originated with Hillary Clinton herself and was personally pushed by President Obama. Her campaign, through law firm Perkins Coie, hired Fusion GPS, which commissioned the now-debunked Steele dossier — a document used to justify surveillance warrants on Trump associates.

Several individuals orbiting the Clinton operation have remained influential. Jake Sullivan, who served as President Biden’s national security adviser, was a foreign policy aide to Clinton during her 2016 campaign. He was named in 2021 as a figure involved in circulating the collusion narrative, and his presence in successive Democratic administrations suggests institutional continuity.

Andrew McCabe, then the FBI’s deputy director, approved the use of FISA warrants derived from unverified sources. His connection to the internal “insurance policy” discussion — described in a 2016 text by FBI official Peter Strzok to colleague Lisa Page — underscores the Bureau’s political posture during that election cycle.

The list of political enablers is long but revealing:

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who, as a former representative from California, chaired the House Intelligence Committee at the time and publicly promoted the collusion narrative while having access to intelligence that contradicted it.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), both members of the “Gang of Eight” with oversight of intelligence operations, advanced the same narrative despite receiving classified briefings.

Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, exchanged encrypted text messages with a Russian lobbyist in efforts to speak with Christopher Steele.

These were not passive recipients of flawed intelligence. They were participants in its amplification.

The funding networks behind the machine

The deep state’s operations are not possible without financing — much of it indirect, routed through a nexus of private foundations, quasi-governmental entities, and federal agencies.

George Soros’ Open Society Foundations appear throughout the Durham annex. In one instance, Open Society Foundations documents were intercepted by foreign intelligence and used to track coordination between NGOs and the Clinton campaign’s anti-Trump strategy.

This system was not designed for transparency but for control.

Soros has also been a principal funder of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, which ran a project during the Trump administration called the Moscow Project, dedicated to promoting the Russia collusion narrative.

The Tides Foundation and Arabella Advisors both specialize in “dark money” donor-advised funds that obscure the source and destination of political funding. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was the biggest donor to the Arabella Advisors by far, which routed $127 million through Arabella’s network in 2020 alone and nearly $500 million in total.

The MacArthur Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation also financed many of the think tanks named in the Durham annex, including the Council on Foreign Relations.

Federal funding pipelines

Parallel to the private networks are government-funded influence operations, often justified under the guise of “democracy promotion” or counter-disinformation initiatives.

USAID directed $270 million to Soros-affiliated organizations for overseas “democracy” programs, a significant portion of which has reverberated back into domestic influence campaigns.

The State Department funds the National Endowment for Democracy, a quasi-governmental organization with a $315 million annual budget and ties to narrative engineering projects.

The Department of Homeland Security underwrote entities involved in online censorship programs targeting American citizens.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Pentagon, from 2020 to 2024, awarded over $2.4 trillion to private contractors — many with domestic intelligence capabilities. It also directed $1.4 billion to select think tanks since 2019.

According to public records compiled by DataRepublican, these tax-funded flows often support the very actors shaping U.S. political discourse and global perception campaigns.

Not just domestic — but global

What these disclosures confirm is that the deep state is not a theory. It is a documented structure — funded by elite donors, shielded by bureaucracies, and perpetuated by operatives who drift between public office and private influence without accountability.

This system was not designed for transparency but for control. It launders narratives, neutralizes opposition, and overrides democratic will by leveraging the very institutions meant to protect it.

With the Durham annex and the ODNI report, we now see the network's architecture and its actors — names, agencies, funding trails — all laid bare. What remains is the task of dismantling it before its next iteration takes shape.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.