Racial Held Evans

It is somewhat difficult for me to piece this together because Rachel Held Evans has blocked me on Twitter, and so I only get oblique references from other directions. But apparently there has been another outburst of indignation against me on Twitter for my views on race and Southern slavery, and some of her comments are in the mix.Nice Smile

In order to provide such indignation a friction-free surface on which to slide around, it has proven necessary to grease up the requisite Twitter plastic surface with lies and half-truths, applying them liberally, and then to pour several gallons of liberal bromide oil over the whole thing. For the curious, I have addressed almost all of that gunk elsewhere. Try here for the book, here for a blog post, and here another one, and here for the beginning of a very civil blog discussion with Thabiti Anyabwile. For that entire interaction, you can just type Thabiti in my search bar.

But my purpose today is not to answer all the ongoing misrepresentations of my views on race. Rather, I really need to stand up for The Gospel Coalition. They are not really in a position to say what obviously needs to be said about all this, and so I shall do it.

In a bank shot that I was able to read because someone else quoted it, RHE said this:

@rachelheldevans This is more common than people realize. Especially from orgs that embrace teachings of Douglas Wilson (@TGC) . . .

To which I reply, land of Goshen! oh, for pity’s sake! and crikey! And I rarely use exclamation points.

So here is my answer to Rachel — that, and a challenge.

I have been in print on the subject of slavery for about twenty years now. During that time, the only notable Christian responsible enough to challenge me, and take me up in a real debate was Thabiti Anyabwile, as fine a representative of The Gospel Coalition as you might care to find. He has debated me on this subject, and you, Rachel, have not.

Moreover, I am in the highest degree certain that if you polled everyone associated with The Gospel Coalition, from their conference speakers down to the boys in the mail room, and asked where their sympathies were in that debate between Thabiti and myself, the vote would be something like a 90% landslide, and not in a way that would set me to chortling over my growing influence. I would actually be wondering who the 10% were.

By all accounts, including mine, Thabiti acquitted himself quite well in that debate with me. But I am pretty convinced that you would not fare so well. You snark at me about slavery, hiding behind your petticoats as you do, and from that safe space you serenely ignore the details of exegesis and the facts of history. “I am woman, watch me block contrary views on Twitter.” I am woman, where’s my fainting couch?

For you to take potshots at TGC, insinuating that they have embraced my views on slavery, when they have done far more than you have ever thought of doing to answer those views — through an actual debate and engagement of my ideas — is a bit thick. Isn’t it?

So here is my invitation/challenge. I would invite you to submit an article to me on the subject of slavery, Scripture, history, racism, whatever, taking whatever approach you please. I will post your article in this space without comment, and without editing it. I will wait for a week, letting everyone read it who cares to, and then I will dismantle it in a post of my own. Deal?

143
Leave a Reply

avatar
 
27 Comment threads
116 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
43 Comment authors
Luke PridewcszabojillybeanSteve PerryEric Runge Recent comment authors

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Bro. Steve
Guest
Bro. Steve

I hope she takes the deal.

John
Guest
John

She won’t.

Nord357
Guest
Nord357

She is not going to. Way too much exposure.

“Im not giving that man one corner of my platform to spread his misogyny.

She is also claiming that Doug refuses to debate her.

“He still hasn’t responded to my Bible-based views on sex. Hes not willing to debate me on that”

Pretty common for the 21st century keyboard warrior

idotf
Guest
idotf

Kristen Scharold @kscharold said…
“@rachelheldevans I was taught at a Christian conference that slavery was GOOD for black people because the whites took care of them. Ugh!”
Rachel said…
“This is more common than people realize. Especially from orgs that embrace teachings of Douglas Wilson (@TGC)”
Kristen replied…
“@rachelheldevans Their attempts to save their ego and whitewash history are mind-boggling. http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/slavery/southern_slavery_as_it_was.htm …”
Rachel replied…
“A quote from Douglas Wilson’s book on why slavery wasn’t so bad. Wilson is a regular contributor to @desiringGod.”
and
“Shouldn’t have suggested everyone at @TGC embraces Wilson’s teachings on race. Some (like @ThabitiAnyabwil) disagree”

Andrew Lohr
Member

‘I was taught at a ‘Christian’ conference that big government is GOOD for people because the bureaucrats take care of them.’ Ugh. Same loathsome paternalism as slavery.

ashv
Guest
ashv

“I was taught that families were GOOD for children because the parents took care of them”

timothy
Guest
timothy

This is a stupid woman; why do you care? Ministry? If you are shamed, shame on you!

insanitybytes22
Member

Sheesh. Is she a “stupid woman” or a woman who is stupid? Nevermind.

Perhaps Wilson is attempting to engage because of who he is? Perhaps he doesn’t like being misrepresented? Perhaps it’s an issue that interests him?

drewnchick
Member

Normally, in the English language the adjective comes before the noun it modifies. We would sound rather strange if we said things like, “the door that is red” instead of “the red door.” So, try very hard not to wear shoes that weren’t meant to fit on your feet. :-)

Arwenb
Guest
Arwenb

RHE is using Wilson’s name to take pot shots at TGC for things TGC has not done..

Wilson is standing up to defend TGC against being accused of things they never did.

It’s not a hard concept.

timothy
Guest
timothy

Thanks for clarifying.

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy

Agitators don’t debate.

timothy
Guest
timothy

Christians–the Church Militant–agitate. Debate is our first olive branch…

John
Member

First she would have to be a Christian. She does little but mock God.

Tony
Guest

It’s too bad that she won’t. Douglas Wilson debating RHD is something I’d very much like to see, right along with James R white debating Matthew Vines on “christian” homosexuality.

PerfectHold
Guest
PerfectHold

I recall reading some of your take on slavery way back when, when you were a little rougher around the edges and less diplomatic.
“Slavery isn’t / wasn’t so bad.”
There’s a lot of truth there — though needs some sugar on top.
Seems like you’re backpedaling just a bit instead of owning it.

Luke Pride
Guest

It was not a good situation, but the 14 hours a day (not ending at sunset) highly dangerous and disease filled lives of the majority of northerners was not this “paradise of freedom”

PerfectHold
Guest
PerfectHold

By “isn’t / wasn’t so bad” — I mean to compare against the existential hell-on-earth about which moderns compare bodily slavery against progressive enlightenment.

You can be a slave to sin, degradated of mind, self-mutilating your flesh, but OH so gloriously, happily FREE in body to eat the fruit of the knowledge of good & evil.

They pity & weep for the souls in bodily slavery that are not FREE to wallow in filth of their choosing.

They proclaim to be willing to DIE for your right to choose evil.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

But, Perfect Hold, doesn’t God want us to be free to choose evil? What worth is our obedience if it is compelled by our circumstances? How is the soul of the enslaved person who resents his slavery in any better condition than that of the free person who misuses his liberty?

timothy
Guest
timothy

Dear Jilly,

We, absent Him are slaves to sin. It is only His grace that saves us; none of us, not one…

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Of course, that is true. But even when God’s grace has been given to us, we are still able to reject that grace and to choose to commit evil. Or is this one of the fundamental differences between Reformed and Catholic doctrine?

PerfectHold
Guest
PerfectHold

Is that a design feature you expect to see in the next world?

Katecho
Member

Biblical freedom is not mere possession of choices, and unrestricted
access to options. Biblical freedom is not being turned loose in Bunyan’s Vanity Fair of options. Rather biblical freedom is the power to
choose to do what is right. We will be truly free in the eternal state,
because the fallen sinful flesh will be removed and we will have a
glorified body, nature, and desires. We will not choose according to the
old flesh any longer. We will be given the nature and power to
successfully resist all temptations and wicked choices. That’s freedom.

PerfectHold
Guest
PerfectHold

Sounds lovely.
And it must be true.

But you’re making it sound as though Adam & Eve were NOT truly free yet in Eden, even before they sinned. (and I agree)

If you’re right, then Eve may well have known she was in a state of transition — a place of being and knowing that was going to change, one way or another.

She was then rightly restive when the snake brought up the subject of future conditions and states of being.

Katecho
Member

I can’t speak too dogmatically, but I believe that Adam and Eve’s nature originally included the ability and possibility to choose true obedience, as well as disobedience. I believe this was God’s design in order to make known His character, and to demonstrate His sacrificial and redemptive love. I don’t believe that Adam and Eve were completely free of the external pull, craftiness and deceit of the dragon. They did not have the power and maturity to see through his foreign lies, but they did have God’s Word, and they made the accountable choice to disobey Him. When Adam and… Read more »

PerfectHold
Guest
PerfectHold

That’s really well said.

Did you mean to say we have the exalted eternal nature (a) promised to us, (b) latent within us, or (c) fully occurring now, albeit obscured with the flesh’s residue?

How do you figure the first practice &/or choice caused and causes and transmits such damage?

Katecho
Member

I appreciate the compliment. Although, in my concluding paragraph, I didn’t mean to imply that we “have” all four of those natures somehow present or latent in us. I just meant that we “have” those four to consider and distinguish as history has unfolded. I believe that the exalted eternal nature is (a) promised to us. It awaits our promised glorification. I don’t believe that it is latent in us or obscured. As for PerfectHold’s last question, I would not say that it was Adam and Eve’s choice, in itself, that affects and corrupts us. Rather it was their choice… Read more »

PerfectHold
Guest
PerfectHold

So is that nature imposed by fiat to all chosen children individualy, or inherited genetically, or assimilated by cultural contact, or?

Katecho
Member

I don’t believe it’s a genetic or mechanistic condition that we can put under a microscope or develop a cure fore. The aspect of our nature that is being discussed is relational and spiritual, it is not a material property. One might say that we reproduce after our kind, but it is also God who applies and enforces the curse, whatever that may mean. If we are born being represented in the first Adam, then we are born in the fallen condition that he introduced. A change of nature and of relationship is something that only God can effect. A… Read more »

Christopher
Member

“But, Perfect Hold, doesn’t God want us to be free to choose evil?”

On the one hand if God didn’t want us to be free to choose evil we wouldn’t be able to. On the other hand how much capacity do we have to choose good? especially in our natural unregenerate condition.

“What worth is our obedience if it is compelled by our circumstances?”

Our obediance is to be compelled by the condition of our heart, which is probably less freeing than our circumstances.

PerfectHold
Guest
PerfectHold

What is the nature of the freedom we’ll have in heaven?

Will we be “free” to choose evil then?

Christopher
Member

At most we’ll likely be as able to choose evil as Jesus was on earth. Of course that is pure conjecture and we’ll find out when we get there.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

But would those Northerners have happily traded their difficult lives for slavery and the absence of personal responsibility? Or did they value their freedom over the dubious privilege of being owned body and soul by someone else?

bethyada
Member

This is true, and freedom is a good. But many people have come to Christ through terrible circumstances. Such is their joy in knowing Him if the choice remains they will choose Jesus over and over despite the troubles.

(I don’t think this justifies a pathway but it might mitigate when we judge a situation for what it is).

Luke Pride
Guest

That’s too broad a question. To be a house slave? Possibly. Does someone who works 14 hour days 6 a week in high risk, contaminated environment and lives in a shack with a starving and sick family tthink that that kind of “freedom” is incredible?

Ben
Guest
Ben

“They (TGC) are not really in a position to say what obviously needs to be said about all this, and so I shall do it.”

Why aren’t they?

Luke Pride
Guest

The 10% who sided with you from TGC stopped following them awhile ago. We realized to them cultural engagement and improving the city for every person was equal to redeeming people from eternal suffering and helping them know God more and more. And the good men in their did not stand against the tide of Redemer and friends social gospel.

Rebecca
Guest
Rebecca

RHE is such a coward.

Michael Lennon
Guest
Michael Lennon

Two banes of Internet existence, RHE (the ridiculous new ‘Christian feminist) and TGC (sad Calvinist apologists) going at it. You can’t find entertainment like this anymore. Awesome.

Tim Bushong
Guest
Tim Bushong

Come on, o spawn-er of “Year Of Biblical Womanhood,” do it–DO IT!!!

“Quit ye like men.”

insanitybytes22
Member

“I would invite you to submit an article to me on the subject of slavery, Scripture, history, racism, whatever, taking whatever approach you please. I will post your article in this space without comment, and without editing it.”

Well now, I find that to be quite a charming and gracious invitation. I hope she takes Wilson up on his offer.

adad0
Member

Ruh roh! ; – )

See my other comment!

JamesBradshaw
Guest

The question is: can you “love your neighbor as yourself” while restricting your neighbor’s freedoms in a way you yourself would never tolerate? Would YOU accept being told by someone that you could not leave your house (regardless of when you were “on duty” or off), that you could not marry or that you MUST marry? Slavery is more than an employer/employee relationship. It is a relationship of domination. It is a relationship of ownership … from sunup until sundown. Many Christians warn of bloody revolution for so much as being forced to bake a cake for people they don’t… Read more »

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I think it is legitimate to restrict the freedoms of children, of the seriously mentally disabled, and of people who have seriously broken our criminal law. But restricting the freedom of people because we think they are not as intelligent and responsible as we are must always be wrong.

ashv
Guest
ashv

Then why do you think it’s legitimate to restrict the freedoms of children, criminals, and the mentally incapable?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Criminals, because they harm the rest of us (as opposed to sinners whose sins may be abominable but who do not violate criminal codes or behave violently to others). The disabled because they sometimes need protection from themselves or from others. If severely disabled, they cannot predict outcomes, foresee dangers, or analyse others’ motives. My faith teaches that we have a moral duty to care for God’s innocents–the people who truly cannot attain moral responsibility. If I have a delusion that I can fly, it is a work of Christian charity to keep me away from windows. But even then… Read more »

Wendell Dávila Helms
Guest
Wendell Dávila Helms

> But restricting the freedom of people because we think they are not as intelligent and responsible as we are must always be wrong.

By that standard are you also condemning the military draft, jury duty, medical insurance mandates, vaccination requirements, mandatory voting (as in Australia), seat belt/helmet requirements, compulsory schooling (the penalties for which fall on adults)…

ashv
Guest
ashv

Can you love your children while not allowing them to do things you do?

JamesBradshaw
Guest

Your own children? Yes.

Other adults? Only in very limited scenarios: prisoners and those incapable of caring for themselves.

But you didn’t answer the question: would you accept as part of your Christian duty someone else limiting YOUR basic freedoms simply because they thought YOU were mentally inferior to them or they didn’t like the color of your skin or the god you pray to?

ashv
Guest
ashv

Depends on what you mean by “accept”. Would I like it? No. Would I pray for a better situation? Sure. Would I commit revolutionary violence as a result? Absolutely not. I don’t “accept” the USA as a legitimate government, but I do my best to not incite conflict with it. I don’t believe in “basic freedoms” as some fundamental value.

The king is God’s deacon and part of that responsibility means “restricting freedom” for his subjects in various ways, just as parents have to “restrict freedom” for their children.

David
Guest
David

Finally read something interesting!

adad0
Member

“So here is my invitation/challenge. I would invite you to submit an article to me on the subject of slavery, Scripture, history, racism, whatever, taking whatever approach you please.”

WILLLSONNNNNNNN!

Now you’ve done it! I think you just triggered another awful book!

A Year of Biblical SLAVERY:

How a Liberated Woman Found Herself Sitting on Her Roof, Covering Her Head, and Calling Her Husband ‘Master’ . by Rachel Held Evans

; – )

Leslie Lea
Guest
Leslie Lea

” I will post toyr article in this space, then I will dismantle it,”. Who needs to go there with that attitude of yours,

adad0
Member

Rachel Held Evans?

“The woman with no attitude”? ; – )

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

Thabiti dismantled you in those debates. And you still refuse to repent and change.

adad0
Member

“repent and change” from what?

2. I DENY THAT SLAVERY WAS A POSITIVE GOOD.

“Am I a defender of the system of Southern slavery as it existed prior to the Civil War? No, I am not. This is a false charge.” DW Controversy library.

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

Read Thabiti’s debate. As Doug said, no one thought Doug won the day with Thabiti. Thabiti dismantled his confederate/God hating propaganda.

adad0
Member

“The first thing to state, because it has often been denied, is that Wilson categorically denounces racism. The book is replete with such denunciations. Here are a couple: … “American slavery had the additional complication of its racial basis. And so we as Christians, especially as American Christians, must denounce as a matter of biblical principle every form of racism, racial animosity, or racial vainglory” (p. 38). “I have no interest in defending the racism (in both the North and the South) which was often seen as the basic justification for the system, and I do in fact condemn it… Read more »

Ryan Sather
Guest
Ryan Sather

So you obviously didn’t read the rest of the debate, eh. Good job cutting and pasting though. Almost as good as my 9 year old on that skill.

My goodness the minions are thick here.

adad0
Member

Proverbs 12:16

Fools show their annoyance at once, but the prudent overlook an insult.

; – )

Rayan, Thabiti Anyabwile says Wilson is not a racist. Wilson says of himself that he is not a racist.

Explain why you keep insisting that Wilson is a racist.
Perhaps your 9 year old could help you!? ; – )

adad0
Member

This part? “Conclusion In conclusion, we believe a fair summary of our conclusions would be this. It is possible for Christians to disagree about volatile issues. Moreover, it is possible — indeed necessary — to do so charitably. The strong disagreement makes us feel like enemies and strangers, while the charity reminds us of our brotherhood in Christ. The strong disagreement tests the bonds of our fellowship and love for one another, while genuine love covers over a multitude of sins and holds all virtues together. We believe we have experienced both the testing strain of strong disagreement and the… Read more »

bethyada
Member

Doug said that 90% of TGCs would side against him, not everyone one.

I think Doug did better in the debate and that Doug understands the deeper principles.

fp
Guest
fp

Oh, look! Another missive from a card-carrying member of the “do as I say, not as I do” coalition. You’re awfully long on accusations and woefully short on specifics, Sather. So when are you going to repent and change? Here’s some specifics: You could repent of your pathological lying. To kick it off, you could issue a heartfelt apology to the group for lying about your identity when you were called out while posting under a pseudonym — a pseudonym you adopted shortly after denigrating people for not commenting under their real names. While you’re at it, you could apologize… Read more »

adad0
Member

Proverbs 27:5-6

5 Better is open rebuke
than hidden love.
6 Wounds from a friend can be trusted,
but an enemy multiplies kisses.

It remains a mystery to me, why it is that Ryan carries on his “romance” with such a dishonest representation of the dialogue between Wilson and Thabiti.
I guess I have a hard time accepting that people, who know something of God, have a hard time letting go of their own dishonesty.

Any thoughts?
Nice job on the rebuke by the way! Too bad that Ryan needs it. : – (

fp
Guest
fp

Honestly, I believe it has to do with his politics. Dishonesty is part and parcel of progressivism; without it, the ideology wouldn’t stand a chance in the arena of ideas. Because of this, many progressives have an intense hatred of those who are on the other side of the political spectrum and would gladly sell their souls if it meant the destruction of those otherwise harmless people with whom they disagree. As they have shown time and time again, nothing is off-limits when it comes to forcing their worldview. No one can serve two masters and it’s becoming increasingly clear… Read more »

adad0
Member

Well, let’s keep Ryan, (and his dad I suppose), in our thoughts and prayers. I had a functional conversation with Ryan a few posts back. If he is in CRU, he could do with a much more mature presentation than he shows now. He may be confusing his own feelings with the Spirit of God. The Ian and Lydia post on this blog had a good section re; “feelings”. I guess my experience with Ryan Sather types is that they are so worried that someone might call them a “fundamantalist”, that they eventually lose their grip on the true fundamentals.… Read more »

mikebull1
Member

The problem with RHE is, like so many today, a failure to actually *understand* anything on its own terms and in its historical context. Instead of asking why and how, everything is judged by how it makes her feel so she is incapable of learning anything. It’s like talking to Veruca Salt.

Matt
Guest
Matt

What then is the historical context that slavery ought to be considered within, and how should it affect how slavery is judged today?

Arwen
Guest
Arwen

Some of the context that needs to be considered: You’ve gone to war against a neighboring tribe. (Why? Probably because they had land or cloth or spices that you wanted. Or maybe they’re jerks and attacked first. Or maybe your people are numerous and your cities are full to bursting.) You’ve won the war and taken over your neighbor’s land. What do you do with the inhabitants? A) Kill them all B) Let them live in their own houses just as if nothing had happened C) Enslave them A) Is a reasonable move, in that the people you’ve conquered won’t… Read more »

Jane
Member

B) also comes with the problem that as war was waged in most of human history, they didn’t have any houses left, and no food to eat in the houses they did have. So it was really “just let them starve.”

mikebull1
Member

See paragraph 2 of Doug’s post above for links. I was also thinking of RHE’s ridiculous and attention-seeking “Year of Biblical Womanhood.” Plenty of Christians struggle with parts of the Bible, but they remain humble before it, unlike RHE.

drewnchick
Member

Or even Morton Salt…

Ilíon
Member

If the “meme” is a picture of RHE, I’m not seeing the nice smile.

Luke Pride
Guest

The debate needs to shift to the injustice of descendants of immigrant factory workers in worse conditions (both were bad) And received no “back justice” should be condemned for centuries to have their wages garnished as a sort of guilt “tax.” Not because of any shAre or ancestors share in real guilt but merely imposed as what is just.
To tell people that they should accept injustice as their civic duty is precisely what SJW promote. The churches that don’t support it still fail to resist it.

Joshua D Jones
Guest

Noble invitation. Not overly expectant that she’ll accept – but good form.

drewnchick
Member

My father-in-law is Scots-Irish. Where’s the social recompense for all the racial injustice shown to HIS ancestors?!!

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Malachi, on behalf of my English ancestors, I apologize to your father-in-law over the Irish question. I think my ancestors might have been more on the cavalier side than the roundhead, but who knows? I feel especially bad about the potato famine as well as the absentee landlords and the Easter Uprising. However, I don’t know what we did to offend the Scots!

ashv
Guest
ashv

“Scotch-Irish” aren’t Irish. They’re people from the English-Scottish border area (many of whom settled in Ulster, many more of whom came to America).

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Does this mean that my people were not cruel to them after all?

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

Oh, I don’t think you need to worry about the Scotch-Irish being on the receiving end. ;)

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Well, that’s good to know. But I am willing to apologize for Bloody Mary. It is hard to find a good word to say for her.

adad0
Member

I am willing to request apologies from Hillary Clinton! ; – )
(and resignations as well!)

Jane
Member

Weren’t the Scots bamboozled by the British into colonizing Ireland? I think they were, at least, rather used.

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

Only in accordance with their character.

drewnchick
Member

Actually, “Scotch-Irish” are simply Irishmen who have imbibed way too much Scotch…which they are certainly wont to do.

adad0
Member

M’, as cosmic justice works its’ self out, I suspect recompense comes to you, in the form of frequent, home made pecan pies. ; – )

Please tell me it’s been a good year for pies on your end!
(It has not been a great year for pies on my end.) :-(

drewnchick
Member

The pies are good as the pecans are plenteous.

jigawatt
Guest
jigawatt

I was just eating breakfast with my kids at a restaurant when a teenager walked by wearing a shirt that said “Black Girls ROCK!”

adad0
Member

Well, sounds like Donna Brazile did not waste any time mounting a public relations campaign! ; – )

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/07/29/donna-brazile-dnc-interim-chair-wasserman-column/87629846/

Kathy Brown
Guest
Kathy Brown

Arrogance !

Jane
Member

Yes, Rachel can be very arrogant.

Kathy Brown
Guest
Kathy Brown

Very juvenile I think you know exactly who I meant !

Christopher
Member

I think you meant to reply to Dunsworth.

Jane
Member

I knew who you meant, but I missed the arrogance in Wilson’s piece so I decided to make my answer in keeping with your comment.

Can you point out the arrogance in Wilsonn’s piece?

Kathy Brown
Guest
Kathy Brown

Sorry I don’t quite get that ? How exactly was your comment in keeping with mine . You obviously we’re reading a different article if you cannot see why it was written in complete arrogance .

Christopher
Member

I’m always amused when people think their opinion is a self evident fact.

rungeeric
Member
rungeeric

Any response yet from RHE?

wcszabo
Guest
wcszabo

This seems like a silly and petty invitation to debate. Tell me how this builds unity within the Body and demonstrates to the world Christ’s love.

Joshua Lister
Guest
Joshua Lister

Doug, would you consider responding to this article she wrote? http://www.vox.com/2016/8/4/12369912/hillary-clinton-pro-life