Firing on All Cylinders
When you've been embroiled in the battle for life for as many years as many of you have, some might think the attitudes of at least a few would border on cynicism, resignation, or at least a kind of low-grade world-weariness. After all, it's been nearly 31 years since an out-of-control Supreme Court careened wildly off course. And judging by some of the decisions handed down last term, a majority of the justices seem even less tethered to the Constitution than they were when they unfurled their abortion-on-demand flag in 1973.
So why are the waves of enthusiasm unmistakable, the sense of energy almost palpable, and the level of expectations, while realistic, higher than ever? Why do pro-lifers see the years ahead as if they were ripe fields waiting to be harvested?
To borrow from the New Testament, you can compare the truth that the unborn is one of us, a member of the human community deserving of our love and protection, to the seed that the farmer is sowing in Matthew 13.
You'll remember that some seed falls on the way-side, some on the rocky ground, some among the thorns, "but a portion falls upon good ground, and gives a return, some a hundred for one, some sixty, some thirty." Regardless of where it fell, the character of the seed was unchanged. What was different was the type of soil needed to flourish.
Which is my way of suggesting that there is a far greater receptivity today to the message of compassion and mutual interdependence that we sow than there was just a few years ago. Or, put another way, the expanse of good soil is growing at the expense of the way-side, rocky, and thorn-infested soils.
Why? Let's start with the effects, then speculate on the causes.
As we have documented repeatedly in this space and in "Today's News & Views," the privileged position enjoyed by self-identified "pro-choicers" has long since gone by the boards. Where once polls showed a wide chasm (in 1995, 56% described themselves as "pro-choice," to only 33% who described themselves as pro-life), now self-identified pro-lifers are virtually identical in number to their pro-abortion counterparts.
Likewise, as recently as 2001, only 45% said abortion was morally wrong, according to Gallup, versus 42% who said it was morally acceptable - - a thin difference of only 3%. But earlier this year Gallup reported that 53% said abortion was morally wrong to only 37% who said it was morally acceptable - - a husky 16% margin.
This ethical recalibration is reflected in growing opposition to all abortion or in support for abortion in very limited circumstances. Let's examine a May 2003 Gallup poll.
When asked, 61% of respondents said abortion should be legal either in only a few circumstances (42%) or illegal in all circumstances (19%). (A 1995 CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll that asked virtually the same question found a total of only 51% taking one of these two more protective positions.)
Looking to the future, the picture grows even more bright. A recent survey of 517 teens ages 13-17 found that almost three-quarters (72%) said abortion was morally wrong.
The poll, conducted between August 1 and August 23, also tells us that a full third (32%) said that abortion should be "illegal in all circumstances." And almost another half (47%) said abortion should be "legal only under certain circumstances." This totals up to a staggering 79% - - 8 in 10 young people!
There are lots and lots of other numbers (between 62% and 70% opposed to partial-birth abortions, for example) that we could ponder, but the point need not be belabored.
A decade ago we were written off, our Movement viewed as if it were driving on four flat tires. A few years later we were told that a "notable aspect of Gallup's long-term measure of public opinion on abortion is the consistency in Americans' outlook over the last quarter century" - - in other words, public opinion stuck in a rut.
Now, it's as if we have new all terrain, high-performance tread. The pro-life movement has gained so much traction we've zoomed by the NARALs and Planned Parenthoods.
But if these are just a few of the results, we still need to talk about the causes. One surely is bound up in an intriguing question Wirthlin asked a year ago: "In light of recent medical advances such as in-utero surgery and 3-D ultrasound technology, which reveal the unborn child's body and facial features in detail, are you in favor of restoring legal protection for unborn children?" A total of 68% said yes - - strongly (44%), or yes, somewhat (24%).
It's as if the unborn child now tugs on our sleeves. No longer out of sight, she is increasingly on our hearts and minds.
And it would difficult to exaggerate the impact of the eight-year-long national dialogue over partial-birth abortions. It would be almost as difficult to better summarize what transpired than this quote taken from the New York Times November 6, the day after President Bush signed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act:
"Yet it is clear that the controversy over the ban has altered the tenor of the debate. The issue first came to the fore in 1995, after abortion opponents discovered a medical paper describing a procedure, performed at 20 weeks of pregnancy or beyond, in which the trunk of the fetus is delivered before the surgeon punctures the skull. 'It was all in plain English,' recalls Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee. That plain English provoked a strong reaction among lawmakers, and eventually the public, turning the discussion away from abstract notions of choice and toward abortion's most graphic details."
"No fair," you can practically hear the pro-abortionists whine. "It's cheating," they complain, to accurately describe without embellishment what actually happens to children when the abortionist is given absolute sway to attack his victim in any manner he chooses.
"What next?" is surely on their minds. "Are you pro-lifers going to start talking about how little arms and legs are ripped off of torsos inside the mother's body? Have you no shame?"
The anti-lifers, as we have discussed many times, are the ultimate slippery-slopers. To hear them talk, every protective measure - - no matter how modest, measured, or supported by the majority - - is really going to "end legal abortion."
Now, of course, they utter these incendiary remarks to fire up their troops and to melt away all distinctions. They know perfectly well that in and of itself a ban on the barbaric partial-birth abortion technique is no more going to "end legal abortion" than is enactment of abortion clinic regulations, or passage of parental notification laws, or statutes that require a woman contemplating an abortion to weigh the gravity of her decision for 24 hours.
What they are really admitting, in a backhanded way, is that their ultimate fear is not you or I, or state legislatures, or George Bush, or even a less compliant judiciary. What they fear above all else is a reawakened America.
What happens when the public can no longer avoid the specter of violence straight out of A Clockwork Orange? What happens when following this blinding flash of illumination, the scales fall from people's eyes?
Where will pro-abortionists turn when women fully realize that the promise of fulfillment has instead left them with empty wombs and troubled souls? What will happen when the public concludes that it wants no part of this vicious, ugly, morally corrupting business?
This is their worst, nightmarish scenario.
Next month hundreds of thousands of pro-lifers will gather around the nation to commemorate the 31st anniversary of the rancid Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions. They will mourn for the more than 44 million babies who have lost their lives and the families impoverished by their deaths. It will be a somber, tearful occasion.
And yet we know - - for all the reasons mentioned above and many more - - that our efforts have not been in vain. Eyes are opening and hearts are softening. You have done work for which no earthly reward could suffice.
Pro-lifers are a curious hybrid of realism and optimism. We know that our journey still has miles and miles to go but we are also utterly confident that someday we will reach our destination.
But if, for any reason, your assurance momentarily fails you, remember the lyrics of Nicole Nordeman: "Help me believe, 'cause I don't want to miss any miracles."
dave andrusko can be reached at daveandrusko@hotmail.com