Pro-Abortion Tactics Use Mary to Deceive Christians

Pro-Abortion advocates are always looking for new angles to convince people to affirm abortion. The latest popular pro-abortion tactic uses Mary (mother of Jesus) to confuse and twist a scripture in order to deceive Christians.

A trending example is James Talarico; a Presbyterian seminarian, and nominee for the U.S. Senate. He describes himself as “A Christian who hates Christianity,” and can be seen regularly attacking a Christian Nationalist straw man on the campaign trail. He is appealing to young generations of Christians who are struggling with deconstructing their faith, or who are disillusioned by what they view to be hypocrisy within the church.

However, Talarico’s credibility is on the line when it comes to abortion. Credibility is highly valued by millennial generations. Maintaining good credibility takes hard work to weigh the argument and investigate the merits of an argument before it is repeated. Leading people to credible truth requires the same effort. James Talarico has not been careful to weigh scripture, and his credibility will pay for it.

Is the Bible Silent on Abortion?

Talarico said in a May 2026 interview with podcaster Jamie Kern Lima, “Jesus never talks about abortion. The Bible is silent on abortion. And when that happens with a social issue as important as abortion, we Christians have to take Scripture as a whole. And we’ve got to try to make some kind of ethical determination,”

I think we can agree that Christians need to look at the “whole of scripture” to discern right from wrong. Yet Talarico is implying that “silence” on a social issue means Jesus or scripture gives blanket approval. It’s like saying, Jesus never talks about driving drunk, so Christians need to make up our own mind about the ethics of driving drunk, and whatever they come up with ethically will be good. But there are multiple scriptures that talk about drunkenness being a vice. Likewise Jesus, and the “whole of Scripture” is clear about murder, and more specifically condemns the shedding of innocent blood. Abortion is the murder of an innocent life. The Bible is not silent on abortion.

Mary had a choice, and you should too?

Talarico described how he is considering the “whole of scripture” on The Joe Rogan Experience. He repeated a marketing concept from Catholics for Choice, “Mary had a choice, and you should too.” Talarico suggested that Mary’s response to being told she would bear the Son of God, implies that consent is essential to life creation, and therefore “implies abortion is biblically justified.”

For context, several orthodox traditions of Christianity emphasize Mary’s consent response to Gabriel’s announcement. She responds to Gabriel with consent to becoming Theotokos (Mother of God). Scripture records, “Then Mary said, “Behold the maidservant of the Lord! Let it be to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her.” – Luke 1:38 NKJV. This makes her worthy of being called blessed by all generations (Luke 1:42-48).

However, this tradition does not consider the possibility of Mary declining the “choice.” Could she decline? Was Gabriel really asking, or declaring what God foreordained? This recorded consent serves up the classic free will vs. foreordained dilemma that plagues much of the debates among Christian denominations. We don’t need to rehash this debate to clarify what scripture is saying!

Luke’s record tells us Mary does not decline, and we have no record of other virgins in the line of David who declined to be Theotokos.

We do need to understand the specific argument Pro Choice Catholics, and James Talarico are making, and not ignore it! Young Christians are resisting Christian Nationalism and migrating to more orthodox traditions! Talarico is being very specific to attract these impressionable Christians. Satan’s oldest deception is a half truth with a twist.

If Mary had to consent, does that justify abortion?

Talarico is suggesting that since Mary |had to| consent, so also |must| all women consent to pregnancy. Therefore, abortion is “Biblically justified” for women who do not consent, or decline to being pregnant. Scripture does not offer an explanation of how Mary conceived. We are only given a short timeline from Gabriel indicating Mary “will” conceive (Luke 1:31). Mary was not pregnant at the time of Gabriel’s visit. This is the difference that matters!

If we assume that God was offering or requiring a choice from Mary, and we assume Mary could decline God’s offer; that does not mean an already conceived life can be declined (aborted) because Mary was given a choice to accept conception. That is to say, a woman who finds herself pregnant today has already conceived. It generally takes at least four weeks for the pregnancy hormone to build up to get a positive pregnancy test! Apart from being forced, consent was already given. A new human life already exists. There is not a second consent phase. A decision to abort a pregnancy is not the same as a potential choice to decline conception by Mary.

Furthermore, Mary was a virgin. She was consenting to God’s supernatural plan for her, not just pregnancy!

Scripture is clear about shedding innocent blood!

Talarico does not take the “whole of scripture” into account like he suggests. He denies scripture that calls the shedding of innocent blood something God detests (Proverbs 6:16-19). He avoids God’s righteous judgment that befell Judah for the child sacrifice instituted by King Manasseh (2 Kings 24). He ignores the prophesies by Jeremiah (19:1-13), Isaiah (3:1-3, 19:1-4), and Eziekiel (16:20-22) against the child sacrifice worship of Molech.

The story of Manasseh is a cautionary tale to leaders who are quick to shed innocent blood.

The wicked King Manasseh of Judah also ignored those prophets. What Talarico is saying matters, because he is leading Christians away from sound scriptural teaching and following the footsteps of King Manasseh. If you read the end of 2 Chronicles, you will find the redemption of the “wicked king Manasseh.” It is a beautiful story that offers hope to people who have repented of past abortions. Unfortunately second Chronicles also records the people of Judah did not repent with Manasseh and Josiah. The whole of Judah paid the price of God’s judgment when the Babylonians conquered Judah took them captive.

Talarico is running to be a US Senator. What’s worse, Jo Rogan encouraged him to run for president! We have the right to vote for our leaders. The kingdom of Judah did not! This month marks The United State’s 250^th Birthday! Will she follow Talarico and others like him  toward child sacrifice as Manasseh led? Or will she repent of abortion, and remember her founding principle that all people are endowed by their creator with life |first|, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Pray for James Talarico to repent.  Ready yourself to defend against this false teaching.

Support Our Work

Pregnancy Care Clinic uses an education model to help people understand and discern the truth about the unborn, and lead people to Jesus. You can join our ministry work by reading more blog articales, volunteering, and by donating.

FAQ

Is the Bible Silent on Abortion?

I think we can agree that Christians need to look at the “whole of scripture” to discern right from wrong. It is a logical fallacy to suggest silence on a topic means it affirms. A similar fallacy would be, Jesus never talks about driving drunk, so Christians need to make up our own mind about the ethics of driving drunk. But there are multiple scriptures that talk about drunkenness generally being a vice. Likewise Jesus, and the “whole of Scripture” is clear about murder, and more specifically condemns the shedding of innocent blood. Abortion is the murder of an innocent life.

Does Mary’s consent to the virgin birth mean abortion is Biblically justified?

Scripture does not offer an explanation of how Mary conceived. We are only given a short timeline from Gabriel indicating Mary “will” conceive (Luke 1:31). Mary was not pregnant at the time of Gabriel’s visit.

If we assume that God was offering or requiring a choice from Mary, and we assume Mary could decline God’s offer, that does not mean a conceived life can be declined (aborted) because Mary was given a choice. That is to say, a woman who finds herself pregnant today has already conceived. Apart from being forced, consent was already given. A new human life already exists from the moment of conception. There is not a second consent phase. A decision to abort a pregnancy is not the same as a potential choice to decline by Mary.

Furthermore, Mary was a virgin. She was consenting to God’s supernatural plan for her, not just pregnancy!

What argument are pro-choice Catholics and James Talarico making about Mary and abortion?

They argue from a marketing concept that Mary had a choice and you should too, implying that Mary’s consent could justify abortion biblically, which the article rejects by emphasizing the full scriptural context.

How does the story of Manasseh relate to the abortion debate in the article?

Manasseh’s shedding of innocent blood led to God’s judgment on Judah, illustrating the danger of devaluing life and following deceptive tactics that promote abortion, which the article warns Christians against following.

What actions does the article suggest Christians take when confronting these arguments?

Christians should understand the whole of Scripture, recognize deception, pray for repentance where needed, and defend against false teaching while supporting ministries like Pregnancy Care Clinic.