Tag Archive for: Motherhood

A Founding Mother’s Faith: Abigail Adams

/in , , , , , /by

“My mother was an angel upon earth. …Her price was indeed above rubies,” wrote John Quincy Adams about his beloved mother, Abigail.[1] Mourning her death in his diary, the secretary of State at the time and later America’s sixth president echoed the words of Proverbs 31:10 in a fitting tribute to a remarkable woman of faith. As we approach Mother’s Day, few lives more fittingly embody the strength, sacrifice, and spiritual depth of motherhood than Abigail Adams.

While she is mostly remembered as the wife of John Adams and the mother of John Quincy Adams, Abigail’s legacy reaches far beyond her proximity to presidential power. During the American War for Independence, she stood on the homefront as a pillar of resilience, supporting her family through an unshakable faith in God. Consequently, our celebration of America’s 250th birthday would not be complete without remembering and honoring the vital role that women played.

If men like John Adams and George Washington declared and fought for the independence of our nation, it was women like Abigail Adams who sustained it. Indeed, Abigail urged John and those men in Philadelphia to “Remember the Ladies.”[2] It is fitting that we do that as well, yet with a particular focus on her faith that was the defining quality and contribution of her amazing life.

A Faith Forged by Family

Born on November 22, 1744, Abigail was raised by devout Christian parents. Reverend William Smith was the Harvard-educated pastor of the North Parish Congregational Church of Weymouth, Massachusetts. Though Abigail did not receive a formal education, she was schooled at home mostly by her mother, Elizabeth, the daughter of John Quincy, a prominent member of the colony.[3]

Abigail and her siblings were taught to read and write, and her father made available his extensive library. However, the Bible was the basic textbook, and Abigail absorbed its words deeply into her life. Throughout her copious correspondence, we see plenty of evidence of her biblical worldview, with abundant allusions and citations of Scripture. True to her biblical namesake, Abigail grew up to be a woman of incredible courage and wisdom.

A Faith Deepened by Loss

At 19, Abigail married John Adams on October 25, 1764, combining her family’s considerable social standing with the Adams family’s rising status. Together, they would have six children, but only four lived to adulthood. In 1770, they lost Susanna, affectionally called “Suky,” when she was only two years old.

When John Adams left Massachusetts to serve in the Continental Congress in 1774, communication came only through letters that often took weeks to arrive. She wrote assuring him of her prayers for God’s wisdom: “You have before you … the greatest national concerns that ever came before any people; and if the prayers and petitions ascend unto heaven which are daily offered for you, wisdom will flow down as a stream, and righteousness as the mighty waters, and your deliberations will make glad the cities of our God” (Psalm 46:4).[4] Yet while John Adams was weighing in on the growing crisis in the colonies, Abigail was left at home to manage the family farm, educate their children, and navigate the uncertainties of an impending war with Great Britian.

While the public rightly remembers John and the other statesmen in Philadelphia, the private burden of sacrifice fell heavily on Abigail. During these years, she endured devastating losses, including the death of her mother and the stillbirth of a child — griefs compounded by her husband’s absence. John Adams, writing from afar, responded with philosophical resignation: “It is not uncommon for a Train of Calamities to come together.”[5] But Abigail’s response reveals the deeper well from which she drew strength, which was not stoicism, but Scripture.

“It has pleased the great disposer of all Events to add Breach to Breach,” she wrote. Then she pleaded, “How long O Lord shall the whole land say ‘I am sick’[Isaiah 33:24]? O shew us wherefore it is that thou are contending with us [Job 10:2]?” Her grief was real, but so was her faith. She drew encouragement from the image of her sympathetic Savior, weeping at Lazarus’s tomb (John 11:35-36), and declared with Job-like resolve, “Yea tho he slay me I will trust in him” (Job 13:15). She added: “But blessed be the Father of mercies [2 Corinthians 1:3]. … Still I have many blessings left, many comforts to be thankful for and rejoice in. I am not left to mourn as one without hope” (1 Thessalonians 4:13).[6]

This was not simply abstract theological reflection. It was lived faith in the crucible of suffering. The word of God was woven into the fabric of her being.

A Faith Revealed by Fire

Abigail Adams did not merely endure hardship, she interpreted it through the lens of divine providence. Her letters consistently reveal a woman steeped in Scripture, who saw both personal sorrow and national struggle under the sovereign hand of God. When British troops threatened nearby Boston, she wrote to Mercy Otis Warren with confidence drawn directly from the Psalms: “Tho an hoste should encamp against us our hearts will not fear [Psalm 27:3]. Tho war should rise against us, in this will we be confident, that the Lord reigneth [Psalm 97:1]. Let thy Mercy o Lord be upon us according as we hope in thee” (Psalm 33:22).[7]

Following the bloodshed at Lexington and Concord, she wrote John:

“The Lord will not cast off His people, neither will He forsake his inheritance [Psalm 94:14]. Great events are most certainly in the womb of futurity, and if the present chastisements which we experience have a proper influence upon our conduct, the event will certainly be in our favor. … Pharaoh’s [i.e., King George III’s] heart is hardened, and he refuseth to hearken to them and will not let the people go [Exodus 8:32]. May their deliverance be wrought out for them, as it was for the children of Israel” (Exodus 12-14).[8]

A few weeks later, as militia units from all over Massachusetts and adjacent colonies converged to surround occupied Boston, Abigail encouraged herself and John from the example of Nehemiah:

“We live in continual expectation of hostilities. Scarcely a day that does not produce some; but like good Nehemiah, having made our prayer unto God and set the people with their swords, their spears, and their bows, we will say unto them ‘Be not ye afraid of them; remember the Lord, who is great and terrible, and fight for your brethren, your sons, and your daughters, your wives and your houses’” (Nehemiah 4:14).[9]

She added a prayer: “Almighty God, cover the heads of our countrymen [Psalm 140:7], and be a shield to our dear friends [Psalm 3:3]! … May we be supported and sustained in the dreadful conflict.”[10]

After the British burned Charlestown and the costly Battle of Bunker Hill, she reminded her husband: “The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong [Ecclesiastes 9:11]; but the God of Israel is He that giveth strength and power unto his people [Psalm 68:35]. Trust in him at all times, ye people, pour out your hearts before him; God is a refuge for us [Psalm 62:8].” During the continued occupation of Boston, she offered this prayer, “And unto Him who mounts the whirlwind and directs the storm [Nahum 1:3] I will cheerfully leave the ordering of my lot; and whether adverse or prosperous days should be my future portion, I will trust in His right hand to lead me safely through [Psalm 139:10], and after a short rotation of events, fix me in a state immutable and happy.”[11]

Her faith was active, interpretive, and sustaining. It gave her a framework for understanding both suffering and purpose. Notably, she did not see history as random or chaotic, but as guided by “the great disposer of all Events.”

After Boston was ultimately evacuated by British forces on March 17, 1776 — a moment that could have come at tremendous cost — she credited the Lord: “The more I think of our enemies quitting Boston, the more amazed I am that they should leave such a harbor, such fortifications, such intrenchments, and that we should he in peaceable possession of a town which we expected would cost us a river of blood, without one drop shed. Surely it is the Lord’s doings, and it is marvelous in our eyes” (Psalm 118:23).[12]

Just two weeks before the vote on the Declaration of Independence, Abigail wrote with confidence in God: “I feel no great anxiety at the large armament designed against us. The remarkable interpositions of Heaven in our favor cannot be too gratefully acknowledged. He who fed the Israelites in the wilderness [Deuteronomy 8:16], ‘who clothes the lilies of the field [Matthew 6:28], and feeds the young ravens when they cry’ [Job 38:41], will not forsake a people engaged in so righteous a cause, if we remember his loving-kindness.”[13]

Even in moments of deep anxiety — fearing for her husband abroad and her son traveling across the Atlantic — she anchored herself in God’s promises:

“In contemplation of my situation, I am sometimes thrown into an agony of distress. Distance, dangers, and oh, I cannot name all the fears which sometimes oppress me, and harrow up my soul. Yet must the common lot of man one day take place, whether we dwell in our native land or are far distant from it. That we rest under the shadow of the Almighty [Psalm 91:1] is the consolation to which I resort, and find that comfort which the world cannot give” (John 14:27).[14]

This awareness of God’s presence sustained her through years of uncertainty. It also shaped the spiritual atmosphere of her home. Abigail did not merely teach doctrine; she modeled dependence on God in every circumstance.

A Faith that Formed Her Family

Though married, Abigail Adams effectively lived as a single mother for much of the Revolutionary era. With John frequently away — first in Philadelphia, later in Europe — she bore the full responsibility of raising their children.

She managed finances, oversaw the farm, and maintained order in a time of chaos. Yet her greatest labor was not economic or logistical — it was spiritual. “Our Little ones… shall not be deficient in virtue or probity if the precepts of a Mother have their desired Effect,” she assured her husband. However, she also recognized the challenge of raising children without a father’s daily example. In a gentle but pointed rebuke, she wrote: “They would be doubly in-forced could they be indulged with the example of a Father constantly before them.”[15] Abigail understood that motherhood required both instruction and example. And though she bore the burden alone, she refused to lower the standard.

From his earliest years, Abigail instilled in John Quincy Adams the habits of prayer, moral discipline, and a sense of duty to God and country. After he left with his father for Europe, she wrote:

“Tis almost four Months since you left your Native land and Embarked upon the Mighty waters in quest of a Foreign Country. Altho I have not perticuliarly wrote to you since yet you may be assured you have constantly been upon my Heart and mind.

“It is a very dificult task my dear son for a tender parent to bring their mind to part with a child of your years into a distant Land… You have arrived at years capable of improving under the advantages you will be like to have if you do but properly attend to them. They are talents put into your Hands of which an account will be required of you hereafter, and being possessd of one, two, or four, see to it that you double your numbers [Matthew 25:14-30]…

“Great Learning and superior abilities, should you ever possess them, will be of little value and small Estimation, unless Virtue, Honour, Truth and integrety are added to them. Adhere to those religious Sentiments and principals which were early instilled into your mind and remember that you are accountable to your Maker for all your words and actions [Ecclesiastes 12:1,14; Matthew 12:36]… I would much rather you should have found your grave in the ocean you have crossed, or that any untimely death crop you in your infant years, than see you an immoral, profligate, or Graceless child.”[16]

In June of 1780, Abigail Adams wrote to then 13-year-old John Quincy reminding him about the foundations for personal character and civil society:

“The only sure and permanent foundation of virtue is religion. Let this important truth be engraven upon your heart, and that the foundation of religion is the belief of the one only God, and a just sense of his attributes as a Being infinitely wise, just, and good, to whom you owe the highest reverence, gratitude, and adoration, who superintends and governs all nature… , even to clothing the lilies of the field [Matthew 6:28] and hearing the young ravens when they cry [Psalm 147:9], but more particularly regards man whom he created after his own Image [Genesis 1:27] and breathed into him an immortal spirit [Genesis 2:7] capable of a happiness beyond the grave, to the attainment of which he is bound to the performance of certain duties which all tend to the happiness and welfare of society and are comprised in one short sentence expressive of universal benevolence, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”” (Leviticus 19:18).[17]

Indeed, years later John Quincy would testify to the enduring impact of her influence: “she taught me to repeat daily, after the Lord’s Prayer, before rising from bed, the Ode of Collins on the patriot warriors who fell in the war to subdue the Jacobite rebellion of 1745. … Of the impression made upon my heart by the sentiments inculcated in these beautiful effusions of patriotism and poetry, you may form an estimate by the fact that now, seventy-one years after they were thus taught me, I repeat them from memory.”[18] Such was the curriculum of Abigail Adams, who was a mother shaping not only a child, but a statesman.

A Faith that Impacted the Future

What sets Abigail Adams apart is not only her godly endurance and her biblical instruction but also her clarity of vision. She understood the inseparable connection between private virtue and public life. In another 1775 letter to Mercy Owen Warren, Abigail expressed a principle that she clearly held dear — that patriotism and belief in providence went hand in hand:

“A patriot without religion in my estimation is as great a paradox, as an honest man without the fear of God. Is it possible that he whom no moral obligations bind, can have any real good will towards man, can he be a patriot who by an openly vicious conduct is undermining the very bonds of society, corrupting the morals of youth, and by his bad example injuring that very country he professes to patronize more than he can possibly compensate by his intrepidity, generosity, and honor? The Scriptures tell us righteousness exalteth a nation” (Proverbs 14:34).[19]

In Abigail’s correspondence with John, she argued that civic responsibility must be grounded in moral and religious duty: “[A] true patriot must be a religious man. I have been led to think from a late defection, that he who neglects his duty to his Maker may well be expected to be deficient and insincere in his duty towards the public.”[20] This insight would later echo in John Adams’s own famous declaration that the Constitution was made “only for a moral and religious people.”[21] But long before it became political philosophy, it was a wife and mother’s conviction.

In fact, Abigail cited Scripture to John Quincy about the importance of cultivating self-government before attempting to govern others:

“The due Government of the passions has been considered in all ages as a most valuable acquisition, hence an inspired writer observes, He that is slow to anger is better than the Mighty, and he that ruleth his Spirit than he that taketh a city [Proverbs 16:32]. This passion unrestrained by reason cooperating with power has produced the subversion of cities, the desolation of countries, the massacre of nations, and filled the world with injustice and oppression. … Having once obtained this self-government you will find a foundation laid for happiness to yourself and usefulness to mankind. ‘Virtue alone is happiness below,’ and consists in cultivating and improving every good inclination and in checking and subduing every propensity to evil.”[22]

Abigail saw the home as the training ground for the republic. If children were not raised with self-discipline, courage, and virtue, the nation itself would suffer. In an age obsessed with liberty, Abigail Adams never lost sight of the deeper truth: freedom without virtue is fragile and doomed to fail. With personal virtue and the favor of God, there could be success.

The Legacy of a Godly Mother

When Abigail Adams died on October 28, 1818, her son John Quincy surely had in mind Proverbs 31 as he reflected on her life. On November 1, he took time to write these heartfelt words:

“My mother was an angel upon earth. She was a minister of blessing to all human beings within her sphere of action. Her heart was the abode of heavenly purity. She had no feelings but of kindness and beneficence; yet her mind was as firm as her temper was mild and gentle. She had known sorrow, but her sorrow was silent. She was acquainted with grief [Isaiah 53:3], but it was deposited in her own bosom. She was the real personification of female virtue, of piety, of charity, of ever active and never intermitting benevolence [Proverbs 31:10a, 20]. … [Y]et she has been to me more than a mother. She has been a spirit from above watching over me for good, and contributing by my mere consciousness of her existence to the comfort of my life.”[23]

On November 3, John Quincy concluded his remembrance:

“Never have I known another human being the perpetual object of whose life was so unremittingly to do good. It was a necessity of her nature. Yet so unostentatious, so unconscious even, of her own excellence, that even the objects of her kindness often knew not whence it came… She had suffered often and severely from fits of long and painful sickness, always with calmness and resignation. She had a profound, but not an obtrusive, sensibility. She was always cheerful, never frivolous; she had neither gall nor guile. Her attention to the domestic economy of her family was unrivalled-rising with the dawn, and superintending the household concerns with indefatigable and all-foreseeing care [Proverbs 31:15, 27]… She had been, during the war of our Revolution, an ardent patriot, and the earliest lesson of unbounded devotion to the cause of their country that her children received was from her. She had the most delicate sense of propriety of conduct, but nothing uncharitable, nothing bitter. Her price was indeed above rubies” (Proverbs 31:10).[24]

Certainly, this tribute of John Quincy Adams to his mother fulfilled the call of Proverbs 31:28: “Her children arise up and call her blessed.” Hers was a faith that was quiet but profound, and whose influence endured long after her passing.

As we have seen in her letters and in her son’s testimony, Abigail’s legacy cannot be measured only by her connections to the offices her husband and son held, but in the character she helped shape and the faith she faithfully lived out. Abigail Adams represents a generation of women whose sacrifices were often unseen but indispensable. They ran households, supported the war effort, counseled their husbands, poured into their children, and prayed for the success of a fragile nation. But more than that, they anchored the American experiment in something deeper than politics: A recognition of duty to God, family, and country.

On this Mother’s Day, Abigail Adams stands as a powerful reminder that the strength of a nation is forged not only in its legislatures and battlefields, but in its homes. She was a woman of deep sorrow, yet deeper faith. A mother burdened with responsibility, yet unwavering in conviction. A patriot who believed that liberty must be rooted in righteousness. Her life asks a question that still echoes today: What kind of mothers — and fathers — are shaping the next generation?

For Abigail Adams, the answer was clear. Teach them to fear God. Train them in virtue. Prepare them for service. And trust, in every season, the One who “carves out our portion in tender mercy.”[25]

AUTHOR

Kenyn Cureton

Dr. Kenyn Cureton is Vice President for Christian Resources at Family Research Council.

Notes:

[1] John Quincy Adams, Entries for November 1-3, 1818, as found in Charles Francis Adams, ed. Memoirs of John Quncy AdamsComprising Portions of His Diary from 1795 to 1848, Vol. 4, (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippencott & Co., 1874), 155-158.

[2] Abigail Adams to John Adams on March 31, 1775 in Charles Francis Adams, ed., Familiar Letters of John Adams and His Wife Abigail Adams, During the Revolution, (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, 1875), 149.

[3] John Quincy served as a militia colonel, Speaker of the Massachusetts Assembly, and member of the colonial Governor’s council. See https://firstladies.org/home/first-ladies/abigail-adams.

[4] Abigail Adams to John Adams on September 16, 1774, Familiar Letters, 36. Bracketed items added here and throughout to provide Scripture references.

[5] John Adams to Abigail Adams on October 1, 1775, Familiar Letters, 100.

[6] Abigail Adams to John Adams on October 9, 1775, Familiar Letters, 105-06.

[7] Abigail Adams to Mercy Otis Warren on February 3, 1775 as found in Adams Family Correspondence, vol. 1, 184, which can be viewed here: https://www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/index.php/view/ADMS-04-01-02-0122.

[8] Abigail Adams to John Adams on May 7, 1775, Familiar Letters, 54.

[9] Abigail Adams to John Adams on June 18, 1775, Familiar Letters, 67.

[10] Ibid., 68.

[11] Abigail Adams to John Adams on September 18, 1775, Familiar Letters, 98.

[12] Abigail Adams to John Adams on March 17-18, 1776, Familiar Letters, 143-44.

[13] Abigail Adams to John Adams on June 20, 1776, Familiar Letters, 188.

[14] Abigail Adams to John Adams on June 8, 1779, Familiar Letters, 365-66.

[15] Abigail Adams to John Adams on May 7, 1776, Familiar Letters, 169-70.

[16] Abigail Adams to John Quincy Adams, June 1778, vol. 3, 37 as found online here: https://www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/index.php/view/ADMS-04-03-02-0034.

[17] Abigail Adams to John Quincy Adams, May 1778, vol. 3, 311 as found online here: https://www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/index.php/view/ADMS-04-03-02-0240.

[18] John Quincy Adams to Joseph Sturge in 1846 in Memoirs of John Quincy Adams, (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott and Company, 1874), 1:5-6. See online here: https://www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/view?mode=n&id=AFC01d153n3.

[19] Abigail Adams to Mercy Otis Warren on November 5, 1775 in Adams Family Correspondence, vol. 1, 323, as found online here: https://www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/index.php/view/ADMS-04-01-02-0213.

[20] Abigail Adams to John Adams on November 5, 1775, Familiar Letters, 122.

[21] John Adams to Massachusetts Militia, October 11, 1798 in Charles Francis Adams, ed., The Works of John Adams – Second President of the United States: with a Life of the Author, Notes, and Illustration, 10 vols., (Boston: Little, Brown, & Co., 1854), 9:228-229.

[22] Abigail Adams to John Quincy Adams, May 20, 1780, vol. 3, 312 as found online here: https://www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/index.php/view/ADMS-04-03-02-0240. Note that the additional quote is from Alexander Pope.

[23] John Quincy Adams on November 1, 1818 in Memoirs, 155.

[24] Ibid., 158.

[25] Abigail Adams to John Adams on October 9, 1775, Familiar Letters, 106.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Biden CIA Memo Tied ‘Motherhood and Homemaking’ to White Supremacy

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

When a CIA memo begins with a trigger warning, there’s a good chance the contents “fall short of the high standards of impartiality that CIA must uphold and do not reflect the expertise for which our analysts are renowned.” Thus, CIA Director John Ratcliffe dismissed a Biden-era memo “Women Advancing White Racially and Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremist Radicalization and Recruitment,” which the CIA published (with redactions) and retracted on February 20.

The memo warned that women were joining a movement it called “white racially and ethnically motivated violent extremist,” or “REMVE.” Or, more accurately, it warned of women becoming “white REMVE-sympathetic,” which it defined as people who do “not openly advocate violence but amplify white REMVE narratives.”

From there, the memo proceeded to warn about “the white REMVE view of traditional motherhood” and that one group of concern, whose identity was redacted in the final report, “has lauded motherhood and homemaking as women’s most important responsibility.”

If any analyst had ever bothered to read this paper aloud before circulating it, he or she would likely have tossed the whole thing in derision. Seriously, who in their right mind puts “motherhood,” “homemaking,” and “violent extremism” together in the same sentence? Who ever feared that the frazzle-haired woman patiently towing three tots through the taco aisle on a Tuesday morning is planning to lob a Molotov cocktail at the nearest federal courthouse?

Indeed, the whole project was built on the “REMVE-sympathetic” category, an absurdly self-defeating term. The essential feature of “REMVEs” is violence; without violence, “REMEs” (without the V) would merely be racists. On the other hand, this CIA memo creates the “REMVE-sympathetic” category to classify those it would like to label as “REMVEs,” but who have, by the memo’s own admission, not even advocated violence.

The only reason given for connecting the two categories is that they make some similar points. The memo announces, in effect, “Guys, we noticed that some violent people and some non-violent people hold the same racist opinions. And, what’s more, the non-violent ones endorse motherhood. Viola! A vast conspiracy!” Real groundbreaking stuff there.

Keep in mind that this memo was circulated by and in the Central Intelligence Agency, which means national security intelligence analysts wasted their time writing and reading this twaddle. Additionally, since the CIA has an international focus, they wasted their time informing Americans about foreign, non-violent racists (but only the white ones).

The ideological motive behind the document’s quack terminology was hardly concealed. “We define ‘white REMVE-sympathetic’ actors as individuals or groups who may not openly advocate violence but amplify white REMVE narratives regarding their perceptions of racial and ethnic hierarchy, as well as perceived threats from those they see as advocating multiculturalism and globalization” (emphasis added).

Aha, now they tip their hand. The real purpose of this exercise was to try and legitimize the “white REMVE-sympathetic” category as a label that would pollute any opponent of “multiculturalism and globalization” with the stench of violent extremism, even if they never dreamed of advocating for or committing violence. In other words, this is weaponized language the far-Left tried to use to cast one-half of the American political spectrum as “beyond the pale.”

The memo was released on October 6, 2021, the same week as the National School Boards Association (NSBA) wrote a letter to the Biden administration — later revealed to be orchestrated with the White House — complaining that parents protesting progressive school board policies constituted a domestic terror threat. The letter, which the NSBA later retracted after losing half its membership, pretended to give a dozen examples, not one of which involved actual violence by parents.

The CIA memo sang from the same songbook. After opening with the trigger warning, “This product contains references to racial, sexual, and gendered violence,” it contained nearly nothing of the kind. Aside from a few redacted paragraphs that cannot be analyzed, the 15-page document contains only one account of actual violence, a 2018 white supremacist terror attack in Germany. Nevertheless, terms like “violent extremism” or the acronym “REMVEs” ran throughout the memo.

Instead, the memo compiled a handful of examples where female influencers expressed allegedly racist views through popular social media trends. “Some white REMVE-sympathetic women have produced blogs, videos, or other online content under the guise of cooking tutorials, which feature discussions about the importance of organic food alongside subtle narratives about racial purity and the defense of white European heritage,” according to research the memo cited from a German nonprofit.

In another instance, the memo recorded, Canadian media personality “Lauren Southern … posted a makeup tutorial interwoven with anti-Muslim sentiment to her US-based video streaming platform channel.”

Cooking videos and makeup tutorials? Where will the violence end?

Utter ignorance constrains this author to form no opinion at all of Southern as a political commentator or a person, but it’s worth noting several points about her inclusion on this list. First, the inclusion of a Canadian commentator with an American show was the closest the memo came to commenting on domestic American politics — close enough to suggest the authors knew how their report might have a domestic influence.

Second, a woman’s “anti-Muslim sentiment” may be as legitimate as a black American’s anti-segregation sentiment: “I sure am glad I live in a country where the makeup I work so hard to apply will actually be seen, not like those places governed by Sharia law.” Whether Southern’s sentiments were of this nature or something more offensive, the memo neglects to specify. But those who pretend to obsess over the rights of oppressed groups should at least remember which groups are actually oppressed.

Third, strictly speaking, “anti-Muslim sentiment” falls outside the “REMVE” category because “Muslim” is not a race or ethnicity but a religion. The authors likely meant “anti-Arab sentiment,” a term that usually overlaps but not always. The oversight is of small importance, but the fact that the authors committed such an oversight shows that this memo was not written (or edited) with a careful eye for accuracy.

In fairness to the authors, however, they did take care, on the whole, to cite actual racists or members of white supremacist groups, even if the narrative they crafted cast a much wider net. “White REMVEs and their sympathizers have claimed in online posts that it is essential for white families to have as many biological children as possible to counter the rising birthrates among non-white populations,” the document continued. “White REMVEs allege that this rise is a conspiracy, which they have termed the ‘great replacement.’”

It is true that the white supremacist fringe has imbibed the “great replacement” conspiracy theory and views the West’s racially diversifying population as a threat. It is also true that imputing belief in this conspiracy theory to any and every natalist (some who think having more babies is a good thing) is also a conspiracy theory.

Indeed, of the many good reasons why people want to see more babies born, racist fears don’t even make the list. There are sociological reasons: a national birthrate below population replacement (approximately 2.1 babies per woman) results in population decline, causing empty cities and a crisis of elder care. There are historical reasons: healthy and successful nations and civilizations have cherished their young instead of eliminating them. There are biblical reasons: God instituted childbirth as a blessing (Genesis 1:28) and imbued every person with the dignity of his image (Genesis 1:27).

Note that none of these reasons distinguishes by race. Those who adopt these reasons want to see families of all races and ethnicities have children, simply because children are good.

Beyond all these, there are a host of more personal reasons why people embrace having lots of children, or why women, in particular, embrace motherhood. There are instinctive reasons: responding to deep-seated desires in our very nature. There are familial reasons: understanding oneself as part of a multi-generational legacy. There are even prudential reasons: seeing offspring as a natural defense against solitude and isolation in old age.

On this point, it’s fair to wonder whether the memo’s tremulous tone even matched its own assumptions. Momentarily assume, for the sake of argument, that there really is a vast conspiracy of violent extremists, motivated by pro-white racism, with plans to engage in terrorism or insurrection. Imagine you then learn that these white racists, far from plotting a terrorist attack, commit themselves to the peaceful tactic of having lots of babies, motivated by their racist beliefs.

From a security analyst’s perspective, wouldn’t this hypothetical scenario induce a sigh of relief? Congratulations, the long-dreaded wave of violence has been postponed by at least a generation! Given that people with racist beliefs do exist, what course of action would you have them take?

To view this as a problem, we must first leave behind the perspective of a neutral security analyst and adopt the perspective of a leftist operative, who wants to determine the country’s future population every bit as much as the racists do, but in the opposite direction — who is committed, in fact, to stamping out racist beliefs by any means necessary. White racists committing to have babies would be a problem.

The whole document could be summarized this way: a handful of women have joined European or Canadian white supremacist groups and sought to craft a role for themselves in online recruitment. But, the document adds, these women ultimately faced barriers to participation and advancement because it turns out the racist group leaders are also misogynists — to no one’s surprise.

We hardly needed an intelligence memo to tell us these facts; yet the Biden administration poured resources into this harmless burrow in an attempt, amid the culture wars of late 2021, to spin these simple but uninteresting facts into a broader narrative about a vast, right-wing threat that echoed throughout any proponent of conservative or national values.

“There is absolutely no room for bias in our work,” CIA Director Ratcliffe insisted, “and when we identify instances where analytic rigor has been compromised, we have a responsibility to correct the record.”

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

4 Inspirational Pro-Life Moms

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Mother’s Day is a wonderful opportunity to reflect on the gift of life, an especially important endeavor since we live in a culture that continues to reject it in a multitude of ways, not only through abortion but in the increasingly common decision of many to intentionally not have children. In the spirit of celebrating the gift of life that mothers have given us all, here are four beautiful examples of moms who are not only championing the preciousness of every life in the culture but are also selflessly mothering their own children.

Melissa Ohden

Melissa, who was adopted as an infant, was 14 when she found out that she was the survivor of a botched abortion. In 1977, her biological mother was 19 when she was forced to go through with a saline abortion by her family. Even though Melissa was soaked in a toxic solution in her mother’s womb for five days, she entered the world alive. Melissa survived due to the heroic actions of a nurse who rushed her to the NICU.

Melissa went on to found the Abortion Survivors Network, which seeks to “share stories and data to humanize survivors’ experiences” and “promote policies that protect and serve abortion survivors, their families and friends.”

Through God’s grace, Melissa was eventually able to connect with “a maternal cousin, my two maternal half-sisters, a maternal aunt — and yes, even my biological mother!” She now has two daughters of her own with her husband Ryan.

Abby Johnson

Abby spent eight years working for Planned Parenthood, America’s leading abortion supplier. As she rose through the ranks of the business, however, she became “increasingly disturbed by what she witnessed.” In 2009, she was asked to assist with an ultrasound-guided abortion. “She watched in horror as a 13 week baby fought for, and ultimately lost, its life at the hand of the abortionist.” Abby soon quit her job and vowed to “begin to advocate for life in the womb and expose abortion for what it truly is.”

Abby went on to write the memoir of her experience at Planned Parenthood and her subsequent conversion to the pro-life cause in “Unplanned,” in which she revealed that she had two abortions before the birth of her first child. “Unplanned” was later made into a film, earning $21 million at the box office on a $6 million budget. Abby also founded And Then There Were None, a pro-life organization that seeks to “help people in the abortion industry leave their jobs and rediscover the peace and joy they’ve been missing.” As a result of ATTWN’s work, over 700 abortion workers have quit, and 48 abortion facilities have closed after these workers left.

Abby now has eight children with her husband Doug, one of whom is adopted.

Lila Rose

At the age of 15, Lila founded the pro-life organization Live Action, which began by giving presentations on the tragedy of abortion to schools and youth groups. Beginning in 2006, she conducted numerous undercover sting operations at Planned Parenthood facilities, posing as an underage girl seeking an abortion. In multiple instances, the Planned Parenthood staff was caught on video encouraging her to lie about her age in order to cover up possible statutory rape and to get an abortion.

Lila has since become one of the leading voices in the pro-life movement through her numerous media appearances and through the work of Live Action, which continues to uncover illegal activity by abortion businesses and produce cutting edge pro-life media content, resulting in “the largest online impact among pro-life and pro-abortion groups reaching over 46 million per month and over 2 billion lifetime video views.”

Lila now has three children with her husband Joe.

Bethany Bomberger

Bethany and her husband Ryan founded the Radiance Foundation, a pro-life organization that seeks to educate and motivate the culture “to put truth and love into action.” She is the author of three children’s books, which focus on the unique gift that each child is as well as the unchangeable and beautiful truth of being either male or female.

After becoming pregnant in her early 20s, Bethany made the courageous decision to choose life. During an interview on CBN, she described a life-changing moment she experienced:

“I had a defining moment. I look back and I think of February 14th, which was Valentine’s Day. It was a Saturday morning at 9 o’clock, and I had my first ultrasound. I walk into this empty room, just by myself, with the ultrasound tech, and I saw for the first time my daughter’s little beating heart. I had this defining moment as I saw in the emptiness of the room, I felt the fullness of the love of God for me, and I just felt that he wrapped my heart and her heart and his heart and just called me back to himself. And that night, I went home and God gave my Psalm 34:5, which says, ‘They looked to him, and were radiant, and their faces were never covered with shame.’ And actually that’s what the Radiance Foundation is predicated upon. But for me it was so personal, because it didn’t matter the shame of my yesterday decisions, ungodly and selfish as they were, but when God infuses you with his glory, his glory becomes what people see, and it’s not shame anymore. I always wanted for my child and for my life to walk in that.”

Bethany has since become the mother of four children with her husband Ryan, including some by adoption, and “loves to celebrate courageous birthmoms and the beauty of adoption.”

Of course, every mother is an inspiring witness to the pro-life cause for a simple reason: they said yes to life and endured hours of pain and labor — in some cases even risking or giving up their own lives — to deliver a child into the world. May our hearts be grateful this Mother’s Day for every mother who has cooperated in God’s plan for humanity to “fill the earth,” with a simple yet profound “yes” to love, self-sacrifice, and new life.

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

3 Ways to Increase the Birth Rate while Respecting Human Dignity

Rescuing Children by Caring for Moms: Why the MOMs Act Secures America’s Future

Over 7,750 Baptized at Huntington Beach in Largest Single-Day Baptism in U.S. History

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

When Lying to Your Kids is OK

/in , , /by

Another Major Parenting Challenge. 

This is a cross-post as I thought it was a well-written, thoughtful piece. Mary Rooke (whom I do not know) is the author, and it was originally published in the Daily Caller. This is her Good Life signup page and her Twitter account.

It brings up an important parenting question: which burdens on our children are harmful and we should protect them from — and which burdens are ultimately a net benefit (i.e., an essential part of maturing)? Here goes…

Welcome to Good Life, a newsletter about navigating our modern culture and staying sane in the process. This week, we discuss the little lies of motherhood.

It’s okay to lie to your kids.

My daughter had surgery this week. I’ve been like a duck on the water, calm on top, telling everyone I know that it’s really nothing to worry about. Underneath the surface, my legs are anxiously pedaling to get to the other side.

I don’t want to worry her, so I lie and tell her the same. In times like these, parents must put their own emotional needs on the back burner to ensure their children aren’t carrying any unnecessary burdens.

Don’t get me wrong. I have complete faith in her surgeon. I’ve been around enough of them in my lifetime to recognize his confidence comes from years of success. He possesses the perfect balance of self-assurance and bedside manner, which makes him a well-rounded surgeon. Still, even well-disciplined doctors find themselves in a tornado of complications. I know this firsthand, but that’s a story for another time.

So I lie to my daughter. I tell her that there is no chance anything bad will happen, that the doctor has performed this surgery a thousand times. I don’t mind carrying the weight of the anxiety about the “what ifs.” It’s my job to send her into that procedure with a calm body. Lying to her is a mercy for her and a sacrifice for me.

Since she is so young, I was allowed to be in the room with her. They needed her awake for the surgery. There were times when she would wince and silent tears would roll down her face. I couldn’t grab her hand and physically reassure her that she was being very brave. Instead, I sat across the room, outside the sterilized area, maintaining eye contact and telling her what a great job she was doing.

These moments were the hardest. At this point, I wasn’t lying about the status of her surgery, but more about my own bravery. I wanted to collapse onto her and cry with her. But she didn’t need me to do that. She needed me to look her in the eyes, smile, and show her love. I had to push my selfishness away in order to keep her morale high.

My daughter really did so well. When the doctor finished, he called it a success. All those worries and fears are now gone. The little lie saved her from the emotional baggage that I willingly carried around for her. While in recovery, she hugged me so tightly, thanking me for not leaving her.

There has been a societal movement that encourages parents to communicate with their children on a peer-to-peer level. While there will be a time for that when they are adults and self-sufficient, until then, it’s incredibly important that your children do not see you as “on their level” in any way.

Of course, the most obvious reason for this is discipline. You want them to respect your authority and listen to your instructions or obey your punishments when they break your rules. However, this is only a small part of it.

When I tell my daughter that I have complete confidence that everything will be okay, she believes me. She doesn’t have to worry about any possible complications because her mother has told her not to.

We aren’t on the same level. I’ve never made her carry unnecessary emotional weight. She’s not an adult. She doesn’t have the life experiences to lean on in times of stress or trouble, but I do.

That’s the beauty of how God created the nuclear family structure. Everyone plays a divinely inspired role that is incredibly important for building a healthy family. My husband and I are not her peers or friends. That doesn’t mean we aren’t close. In fact, protecting the parent-child dynamic builds concrete trust.

She knows that if I tell her I’m going to do something, or, as with the surgery, that everything will be all right, she believes me completely.

I’ve spent her whole life cultivating this trust between us. Not because I have demanded it, whether she likes it or not, but because I chose to guide her through life with confident, loving authority. I haven’t made her come up to my level. I’ve allowed her to grow and mature at her natural pace. With each passing year, our conversations become more sophisticated, but I am cautious not to overwhelm her with thoughts, themes, and stresses that she isn’t ready for.

This isn’t an easy thing to do, because these worries don’t simply disappear. Someone has to carry them and deal with them. But I genuinely believe that a mother’s ability to hold the emotional weight of the family is a blessing. I get to be the one that my children and husband turn to when their worlds are spinning or they are feeling emotionally drained.

I’m sure my husband feels the same way when the girls boast about how they know their daddy could beat up the bad guys. I’ve said this before, but parents have a responsibility to protect their children. I’m the emotional protector, and my husband is the physical one.

After the surgery was over and I had a moment alone, I let out all the pain, fear, and stress. Then I gathered myself to go back in and continue the work. She was smiling when I walked through the door.

There will be a time when she realizes that it will be her job to lie to her children. She will have to be the emotional protector of her family. Mothers are made through their endurance to withstand their role and are rewarded with immeasurable blessings. Her smile was my blessing.

©2025 All rights reserved.

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2025 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

ROOKE: Trump’s Latest Move To Siphon Voters From Kamala’s Largest Voting Bloc Could Be A Game Changer

/in , , , , , , /by

Since Democrats threw President Joe Biden out the proverbial window to anoint Vice President Kamala Harris as the new nominee, female voters have flocked to her campaign. However, former President Donald Trump has a plan to bring a large portion of these voters back.

One of Trump’s greatest weaknesses is his inability to reach female voters on a large scale. While conservative women, in large part, enthusiastically support Trump, a swath of independent female voters aren’t sold on his campaign. But that should all change now that presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. suspended his campaign in most swing states and fully endorsed Trump for president.

WATCH: RFK Jr’s EPIC entrance to President Trump’s rally in Arizona

Women make up just over 51% of Americans; among those, about 18% are mothers, according to a report gathered by Vote Mama Foundation. The group found that 7.7% of women in the U.S. are mothers to children under the age of six, and 10.2% are mothers to children older than six but under 18.

There is reason to believe these women will support Trump now that Kennedy has endorsed his campaign and will be part of his administration, according to female commentator Alex Clark.

“Can’t express to you how amped conservative female voters are after last night. They have been waiting for 20+ years to hear a presidential candidate acknowledge the health crisis stemming from our corrupt food system. Women are re-energized and ready to show out for Trump,” Clark posted on X after Kennedy’s announcement.

A growing concern, one that I have, too, is how we as mothers are supposed to raise healthy children when everything being sold to us, from our water supply to the food at our local grocery stores, is filled with harmful chemicals that disrupt our body’s immune system and prevent us from being healthy. Even seemingly healthy foods like milk, eggs, and meat are hardly fitting for humane consumption.

It all feels too overwhelming to even think about, much less fight against. How is a family in a Biden-Harris economy supposed to afford to buy all organic produce, raw milk, pasture-raised eggs, and grass-fed beef when they can barely pay the mortgage? Not only are we fighting against unrelenting inflation driving prices high, but the products (even if we could afford them) are still filled with chemicals forced onto farmers by the federal government.

WATCH: RFK Jr: Teaming up With Trump, Pavel Durov’s Arrest, CIA, and the Fall of the Democrat Party

These issues and more (the U.S.’s insane childhood vaccine schedule) are the foundation on which Kennedy has built his campaign. Ipsos polling from March 2024 showed that women made up a large portion of Kennedy’s campaign support. Kennedy voters are slightly more likely to be women and identify as independents rather than Democrats or Republicans, according to the polling.

These suburban women are looking for someone to come in and help clean up our environment and make it easier to raise a healthy family. It would be a mistake for Democrats to laugh this off as if their obsession with anti-family policies like abortion are the only things women care about.

Trump’s move to include Kennedy in this fight will not only change the game for his election but should hopefully mark a shift in the American food industry. Kennedy wants to end the revolving door from federal regulators, like the FDA, CDC, and OSHA, into Big Pharma, Big Ag, and Big Food. This would be music to the ears of desperate American mothers.

It’s clear that Trump is gunning for the women’s vote, and Kennedy could help him finally break into their voting bloc.

AUTHOR

Mary Rooke

Commentary and analysis writer.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Elon Musk leads parade of tech titans boosting Trump as the true ‘freedom candidate’

‘Zero Faith’: House GOP Concerned Political Bias Will Impede Trump Shooting Investigations

ROOKE: Red State Election Fraud Crack Down Should Wake Voters Up. It’s Likely Happening In Your State, Too

Taxpayer-Funded Group Offers $30,000 To New Homebuyers — As Long As They Aren’t US Citizens

Harris aides asking reporters for advice on who to finally have big interview with: REPORT

Kamala Harris Used To Think Border Wall Was ‘Un-American.’ Now She Supports It.

New January 6 footage reveals Pelosi’s focus on Trump in hours after insurrection

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Killing Unborn Children Will Never Solve Maternal Mortality

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Since its founding, the abortion industry has always targeted minority and economically disadvantaged women as its prime sources of profit. Today, this anti-life narrative often takes the form of arguing that protecting life in the womb will exacerbate the nation’s maternal mortality crisis — a lie that a bogus new study from Boston University and the Commonwealth Fund attempts to perpetuate.

In the study, titled “The U.S. Maternal Health Divide,” the researchers claim that passing pro-life laws in the states will lead to an increase in maternal mortality and the disintegration of existing maternal health care. The legacy media wasted no time in elevating the report, with outlets like The Hill writing, “The new findings from The Commonwealth Fund confirm what many advocates feared: scrapping Roe v. Wade would have a disproportionate impact on women of color and worsen maternal health overall.”

The pro-abortion narrative is set — the only problem? The study doesn’t actually provide evidence or statistically significant data backing up the claim that protecting life in the womb augments maternal mortality. Rather, the study attempts to correlate the pre-Dobbs maternal and infant mortality rates between 2018 and 2020 with where the state laws now stand on protecting life in the womb in a post-Roe America.

One glaringly obvious issue with the narrative portrayed by this study is that under Roe v. Wade, no state had the ability to enforce a meaningful protection for life in the womb prior to viability. This means that during the period studied, practically speaking, the states now enforcing pro-life protections were indistinguishable from the states that currently allow abortion through 40 weeks of pregnancy.

Furthermore, during the three-year period studied, 20 of the 26 pro-life states reported at least a one-year increase in abortions, with several seeing increases across both years. If abortion were negatively correlated to maternal mortality, then an increase in abortion would cause a decrease in maternal mortality; however, increased rates of abortion in states that are now pro-life did nothing to alleviate the maternal mortality crisis in these states.

The study ignores regions such as our nation’s capital, Washington, D.C., where women are almost twice as likely to die from pregnancy complications as mothers in the rest of the nation. The city also maintains one of the most liberal abortion laws in the United States; an abortionist in D.C. can kill a child in the womb at any point in pregnancy, and the abortionist does not need to be a doctor. The D.C. Abortion Fund directly finances abortions for abortion-minded mothers who struggle financially. If abortion were the solution to maternal mortality, why does unlimited abortion fail to remedy the maternal mortality crisis in areas like D.C.?

The answer, of course, is that killing a child in the womb is not a valid solution to any problem — nor is pregnancy itself the problem when addressing maternal mortality. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimate that 63.2% of all pregnancy-related deaths are preventable. Treating abortion as the solution to the maternal mortality crisis is a waste of time, money, and energy that would be far better directed to addressing real disparities in human flourishing.

For example, limited access to convenient and quality health care plays a major role in whether a woman is healthy before, during, and after her pregnancy. The Commonwealth Fund study attempts to characterize abortion as a solution to maternity care deserts. Of the 26 pro-life states analyzed, the majority are predominately rural, making the solution to a maternity care desert much more complex than simply opening a new hospital. Innovative medical resources, like telehealth services and mobile maternity care units, would go a long way in addressing the maternal health care disparities that abortion attempts to camouflage.

Likewise, abortion is not the solution to poverty. Nine of the top 10 states with the highest poverty rate in the country are states with pro-life protections in place. Poverty often predicts a mother’s ability to access quality health insurance, healthy food, and pharmaceutical resources. In these instances, mothers require assistance to access the resources needed to experience a healthy pregnancy and postpartum lifestyle — not abortion.

A quick glance under the hood of the Commonwealth Fund study reveals the major logical leaps that a reader must make in order to accept the claim that pro-life laws increase maternal mortality. Beneath the misleading pro-abortion framing, however, the report holds some truth: our nation really is suffering from a maternal mortality crisis. But one must only look around the abortion propaganda to recognize that telling poor and minority women that their safest pregnancy outcome is to kill their child is not a real solution.

AUTHORS

Joy Stockbauer

Joy Stockbauer is a policy analyst for the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council.

Connor Semelsberger

Connor Semelsberger is Director of Federal Affairs – Life and Human Dignity at Family Research Council.

EDITORS NOTE: This The Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.