Micah Watson argues that an active conscience is the outgrowth of the evangelical mind. Evangelicalism is the form of Protestantism that relies on the truths of historical Christianity while navigating between mainline Protestantism and fundamentalism. For evangelicals, conscience is founded in the Bible, particularly the writings of Paul. It also flowered in the post-Reformation world, where it was taught that an active conscience signaled a person’s salvation. Conscience also led evangelicals to be active against all forms of sinfulness. In the United States, this contributed to the proliferation of voluntary societies, where Christians who were “saved for service” could exercise their consciences to spread the Gospel or stamp out perceived evils (like alcohol use). Watson traces the history of evangelical conscience into the twentieth century, and he describes voices like Carl Henry and others who sought harmony between the pious strand of evangelicalism, and adherents who were committed to social action. Later in the twentieth century, evangelicals sought peace in society more than saving it. Still, evangelicals continue to oppose perceived social evils, including same-sex marriage.

The Introduction argues that the terms of the American abortion debate have changed in ways we have mostly missed. When forced to give up on a constitutional amendment banning abortion, pro-lifers sought to control the Supreme Court and reverse Roe. As part of this mission, abortion foes promoted restrictions that would hollow out abortion rights and set up test cases for the Court. But these laws did not obviously advance a right to life since they did not criminalize any abortions. To defend them, abortion foes instead detailed the benefits of specific restrictions – and the costs of abortion itself. Over time, abortion-rights supporters had to identify concrete benefits of abortion, explaining whether legal abortion was good for women and the communities in which they lived. Although some resisted a focus on the costs and benefits of abortion, this shift in the terms of the debated sparked discussions about poverty and abortion, the role of government, the changing American family, the influence of abortion on women’s health, and the nature of scientific uncertainty. And surprisingly, as discussion turned to policy costs and benefits, polarization deepened. Both sides disagreed not only about foundational rights but also about the basic facts.