The Changing Political Climate Bodes Well for Pro-Lifers
Democrats Sold a Pro-Abortion "Bill of Goods"
By Dave Andrusko

The January 1998 issue of National Right to Life News, which commemorated the 25th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions, was one of the most widely read of all NRL News editions. The greatest reader reaction was in response to a thought-provoking interview with Canadian Professor of American History Keith Cassidy.

Excerpted from a lengthy phone interview, Cassidy's remarks systematically dismantled a number of silly but powerful stereotypes about the Movement. What these negative portraits had in common, he explained, was that they attempted to marginalize a social movement which is, in fact, a proponent of some of the central values of American life.

In that vein, Cassidy, who teaches at the University of Guelph in Ontario, emphasized that "the Pro-Life Movement operates firmly within the mainstream of American values." While the question of motivation within any social movement is complex, the operating principles of the Pro-Life Movement, he explained, "are firmly rooted in the historic liberal tradition of respect for the indivisibility of human rights."

I spoke with Prof. Cassidy just after Christmas, almost six years to the day from the time of our prior lengthy phone interview. Cassidy, who is at work on a much-anticipated book about the American Pro-Life Movement, was just as stimulating and challenging in our latest in-depth conversation.

His initial observation was spurred by the post-election remarks of a number of Democrats, including its losing presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry, who are thrashing about trying to find a way of dealing with the abortion issue which clearly hurt pro-abortion Democrats.

"The irony is hard to miss," Cassidy said. "For a very long time, an essential part of the pro-choice movement's strategy was to portray the Pro-Life Movement as weak, marginal, and, if not dead, on its last legs."

But the 2004 elections made abundantly clear "that far from disappearing, the Pro-Life Movement came out stronger than ever, with considerable clout," he said. "It had shown again that it is able to mobilize millions and millions of Americans to vote on the basis of an issue of conscience."

The biggest loser, he said, "was the Democratic Party, which made the mistake of believing the press releases of the pro-choice movement." The national Democratic Party "chose to hitch itself to a pro-choice movement that proved itself to be far less influential than advertised and in doing so drove out of the party the pro-life Democrats who are a key component of electoral success at the Presidential level.

In the 1970s, Cassidy argued, "the Democrats were sold on the view that the up to date, hip thing to do was to embrace the pro-choice position." But "like someone making a permanent commitment to the clothing fashions of the time - - bell bottoms and loud jackets - - they are now looking dated and oddly out of step. Clearly, a majority of Americans continue to have serious reservations about abortion."

He added, "Those who proclaimed that the Movement was marginal and irrelevant are now themselves in danger of becoming marginalized," most notably the Democratic Party.

One of the primary reasons the Democratic Party has not loosened its embrace of abortion on demand has been the assumption that the abortion issue would inevitably "fade away," he said. "And the assumption would have been true, had the Pro-Life Movement simply gone away," Cassidy said.

"But pro-lifers refused to be silenced," he explained. "They refused to accept that abortion by default would forever be a part of the social landscape."

How did the Pro-Life Movement kept the abortion issue alive? By means of "enormous resilience, stamina, and discipline - - and very considerable tactical shrewdness," Cassidy said.

Pro-lifers have patiently chiseled away at Roe v. Wade, using every tool at their disposal, he said, from symbolic gestures to such opinion-altering legislative initiatives as the ban on partial-birth abortions.

Asked if there was anything he could put his finger on to explain the dogged determination of the Movement, he paused before giving a very thoughtful answer.

"America is a very democratic culture," Cassidy said, echoing an observation made by foreigners going back to the 18th century.

Cultural "elites" in all societies expect everyone else to defer to their opinions, Cassidy said.

"But in coming to know American pro-lifers over the past 20 years," he noted, "I've been struck by their firm conviction that, as American citizens, it is not only their right but their duty to help shape public policy."

Americans, he observed, "are not a very deferential lot."

Another factor almost always overlooked is that pro-lifers have "refused to accept their opposition's view of who makes up the Movement," Cassidy said. The truth could not be more different than the mindless stereotypes which can be found on the pages of most major dailies.

"The American Pro-Life Movement is deeply rooted in the mainstream of American life and is characterized by intelligence, resourcefulness, and a clear vision of where it wants to go," according to Cassidy.

As an academician himself, Cassidy acknowledged that, far too frequently, the Pro-Life Movement has been treated with barely concealed contempt by academia. "But this snobbery is hopefully changing," he said.

For the truth is that based on "the importance of the cause it has championed, its longevity, and its impact, the Pro-Life Movement is one of the great social movements of American history."