Crossroads Podcast: What Was The Big Idea Of This Year’s March for Life?

It was a headline guaranteed to make the typical New York Times reader do a double take, if not gasp in shock.

That headline proclaimed, “Undocumented Women Ask: Will My Unborn Child Be a Citizen?” Spot the heretical language?

The key was that these “unborn children” were part of a designated victim group at the heart of Times coverage of President Donald Trump’s drive to increase the deportation of illegal immigrants, especially those with criminal records. Thus, these “unborn children” are linked to battles over birthright citizenship, as opposed to merely being part of an oppressed class of endangered “unborn children.”

But the connection between immigration debates and abortion is clear to many religious believers, especially Roman Catholics who embrace a “seamless garment” approach with the sanctity of life — from conception to natural death. Some journalists “get” that connection and many do not, which affected coverage of the 2025 national March for Life. This was the hook for this week’s “Crossroads” podcast.

For example, The Washington Post report — “Trump, Vance speak at antiabortion March for Life rally in D.C.” — included this crucial passage:

The crowd’s biggest reaction at the march, however, came after Trump’s image faded from the monitor and Vice President JD Vance took the stage. In his first public appearance since taking office, Vance positioned what has long been among the nation’s most divisive social issues as a problem intertwined with economic struggle — a theme that helped power the Republican ticket to dominance last November.

“It is the task of our government to make it easier for young moms and dads to afford to have kids,” Vance said. “It should be easier to raise a family, easier to find a good job, easier to build a home to raise that family in, easier to save up and purchase a good stroller or a crib for a nursery.”

At this point, some Democrats have to be asking if this kind of populist language was part of the GOP’s growing appeal, in the Trump era, to mainstream Catholics, blue-collar workers and Latino families.

But Vance — a convert to Roman Catholicism — wasn’t just talking about jobs, economics and, potentially, pro-family legislation. This passage showed the ties that bind woven into his speech (full text here):

… (By) and large, our society, our country has not yet stepped up in the way you have; and our government certainly has failed in that important responsibility. We failed a generation not only by permitting a culture of abortion on demand but also by neglecting to help young parents achieve the ingredients they need to [live] a happy and meaningful life. A culture of radical individualism took root, one where the responsibilities and joys of family life were seen as obstacles to overcome, not as personal fulfillment or personal blessings. Our society has failed to recognize the obligation that one generation has to another, is a core part of living in a society to begin with.

So let me say very simply: I want more babies in the United States of America. I want more happy children in our country, and I want beautiful young men and women who are eager to welcome them into the world and eager to raise them.

This kind of language was featured in speech after speech at the 2025 rally. Try to find even a hint of that content in this all-politics, tone-deaf report from the Associated Press: “Trump and Vance join March for Life anti-abortion activists in celebrating the movement’s gains.”

It would have helped, of course, if a few mainstream journalists had attended the pre-march prayer vigil and Mass in the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception. More than 5,000 students, adults and pro-life activists packed the basilica, even though the upper-sanctuary pews hold 3,500 people. Hundreds of worshippers gathered in the church's crypt, as well as the Marian shrines inside the sanctuary.

During the podcast, host Todd Wilken and I dug into the details of this passage from my national “On Religion” column this week. In this clip from that column, I have added bold-italics text to references to “seamless garment” issues.

As with the rally on the National Mall, the main theme was that the sanctity of human life is an issue that is too complex, and too important, to be discussed in political terms, alone.

The vigil homilist was Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas, who concelebrated the Mass with four cardinals and 21 other bishops. … The preacher scheduled for the vigil was Bishop Daniel E. Thomas of Toledo, Ohio, who was absent due to a death in his family. Thus, Archbishop Naumann's sermon included several passages from notes prepared by Thomas.

Thomas wrote: "We encounter Jesus preeminently in the fragile flesh of a defenseless baby in the womb. We encounter Jesus in the fragile flesh of those born with physical and mental disabilities. We encounter the flesh of Jesus in the fragile flesh of the persecuted, the victim, the immigrant poor and the needy. We encounter the flesh of Jesus in the vulnerable elderly, the imprisoned, the addicted, the depressed, the anxious, the fearful, the dying."

Yes, abortion remains -- for pro-Catechism Catholics — the “preeminent” issue in these discussions. “Preeminent,” as in “surpassing all others; very distinguished in some way.”

Read the Bishop Thomas quote again and note the language — focusing on a few issues — linked to Down syndrome, religious persecution (think Nigeria), prison life (think death penalty), poverty, rising anxiety statistics (think social media) and, of course, immigration reform.

That’s a powerful list of issues — both political and theological.

The bottom line: Next year, more journalists need to attend some of the worship services linked to the March for Life. They will hear plenty of voices, young and old, stressing that the sanctity of human life is too complex to be discussed in political terms, alone.

Enjoy the podcast and, please, pass it on to others.