James Talarico gets abortion wrong… very wrong
By Easton Martin | February 3, 2026
During a 2025 appearance on the Joe Rogan Experience, Texas State Representative James Talarico attempted to bridge the gap between progressive politics and Christian theology.
In a clip that has since circulated widely, Talarico argued that the biblical account of the Annunciation offers a divine endorsement of the pro-choice position. He suggested that because the Angel Gabriel spoke to Mary, God was essentially asking for her consent to carry the Christ child. He concluded that if God respects a woman’s choice, the law should as well.
While this idea may appeal to modern sensibilities regarding autonomy, it fails to withstand a serious reading of the biblical text, attempting to impose twenty-first-century political philosophy onto first-century Jewish theology.
A faithful reading of Luke 1 reveals that the interaction between Gabriel and Mary was a decree. The angel does not present Mary with a contract or ask for her preference. In Luke 1:31, Gabriel declares, “You will conceive in your womb and bear a son.” The grammar is clear and definitive here. Mary’s response is not an assertion of rights but a total surrender of her will. She replies, “Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.”
To twist an act of holy submission to create life into a license to end life is a profoundly disturbing distortion of the narrative. The Incarnation is the story of God becoming man to save humanity, not a parable about reproductive autonomy and the right to kill.
The immediate context of this passage contradicts the idea that the Bible views the unborn as anything less than fully human. Shortly after the Annunciation, Mary visits her cousin Elizabeth. The text records that upon hearing Mary’s voice, the unborn John the Baptist “leaped for joy” in Elizabeth’s womb. The Bible describes the unborn John as a person capable of spiritual response and emotion. He is recognized by the text as a life already participating in the story of redemption.
Finally, Talarico’s argument ignores the core ethical framework Jesus established regarding the vulnerable (one that progressive LOVE to cite about anything and everything except abortion). In Matthew 25, Jesus tells his followers that “as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.” The “least of these” are those who lack power, voice, and status.
There is no human being more voiceless or vulnerable than a child in the womb. They are entirely dependent on the mercy of others for their survival. If we are to take Jesus at His word, we must believe that He identifies with the weak. To argue that Christ would endorse the destruction of the most defenseless form of human life is to fundamentally misunderstand His ministry.
We must be honest about what the texts actually say. The Bible speaks of a God who knits us together in the womb and calls us by name before we are born.
