That's a very important point you've just made, Bingley, and one I feel very strongly about. A great deal of importance is placed by lobbyists (eg anti-abortionists) on not doing certain things, which tends to give most lobbyists (though not all) the reputation of being negative. It's much harder to persuade people to do something by preaching openly, rather than not to do something, because unless you are seen to be doing the thing in question yourself you're open to a charge of hypocrisy. And if that thing is, say, actively supporting victims of adverse circumstances as you describe, then all your energies are likely to be taken up doing that, leaving you little or no time to do the preaching. I suppose the most credible type of anti-abortion lobbyist would be one who speaks out against it, but who also actively supports those who have chosen against it for conscience reasons and consequently need practical help. Such a person would have to be extremely dedicated to the cause.
These considerations remind me of one of the forms of confession in the Church of England (BCP) which says, "... we have left undone those things which we ought to have done, and we have done those things which we ought not to have done." It's interesting that sins of omission are mentioned before sins of commission -- I instinctively think of my sin as consisting of things I have done (or thought) which are against the will of God, but I wonder whether I will be judged more on my failure to do things which I should have done and didn't.
