|
NRL News
Page 3
November/December 2009
Volume 36
Issue 11-12
OUR MESSAGE IS TAKING HOLD
By Wanda Franz, Ph.D.
In March of
1993, a Gallup poll determined that about a third of respondents
(32%) wanted abortion to be “legal under any circumstances.” In the
same year, Mark Donald of the Dallas Observer (5/18/1995)
wrote this:
“On
June 28, 1993, Charlotte [Taft, then director of the Routh
Street Women’s Clinic in Dallas] publicly aired her evolving
views about abortion. ‘We have learned a great deal from the
movement that calls itself pro-life,’ Charlotte told the Dallas
Morning News. ‘We (the pro-choice movement) were hiding from
women some of the pieces of the truth about abortion that were
threatening.... It is a kind of killing, and most women seeking
abortion know that.’ …
“But
the reaction to Charlotte’s public pronouncement was swift—and the
response certain. Kate Michelman, president of the National Abortion
Rights Action League, was quoted as saying she ‘would never tell
someone they are killing through abortion’; instead, she would say
‘they were terminating a stage of fetal development and potential
life.’”
In other
words, pro-abortionists should withhold the truth.
In September
of 1996, Gallup found that support for abortion to be legal “under
any circumstances” had dropped by nearly a third to 24%! (In July
2009, support was down to 21%.) What had happened?
Let us get an
answer from obviously “pro-choice” Jennifer Senior of New York
magazine (11/29/2009). She wrote after the recent passage of the
Stupak Amendment in the House (11/7/2009):
“But
in late 1995, a Florida Republican congressman named Charles Canady
[working closely with NRLC] had a stroke of insight that
would shift it to the realm of both the metaphysical and brutally
physical, which is precisely where the pro-life movement wanted it
all along. On the floor of the House, he introduced a bill that
would ban so-called ‘partial-birth abortions,’ a second-trimester
surgical method previously known as intact dilation and extraction.
The procedure was extremely upsetting to behold. In it, the fetus—or
is it a baby?—is removed from the uterus and stabbed in the back of
the head with surgical scissors. It’s a revolting image, one to
which the public was ritualistically subjected on the evening news
as the debate raged on the House and Senate floors. Defending it was
a pro-choice person’s nightmare. Pat Moynihan compared it to
infanticide. Clinton still vetoed the ban in 1996, but it was
eventually signed into law in 2003 and withstood a Supreme Court
challenge in 2007. More important, women were spooked. ... ”
Also, Senior
can’t overlook that the biological facts of life are not on the
pro-abortionists’ side:
“Generally,
science is the friend of progressive political causes. Not this one.
As fetal ultrasound technology improved during the nineties,
abortion providers, conditioned to reassure patients that the fetus
was merely tissue, found it much harder to do so once their patients
were staring at images that looked so lifelike.”
And then, of
course, there is the increasing unease of abortionist themselves, as
Senior noted:
“Last
year, Lisa Harris, a Michigan doctor, wrote an incredibly powerful
essay for Reproductive Health
Matters, trying to come to terms with the goriness of
second-trimester abortions while simultaneously recognizing their
validity: ‘What do we do when caught between pro-choice discourse
that, while it reflects our values, does not accurately reflect the
full extent of our experience of abortion and in fact contradicts an
enormous part of it, and the anti-abortion discourse and imagery
that may actually be more closely aligned to our experience but is
based in values we do not share?’…
“Harris
… wrote about performing an abortion on a woman who was 23 weeks
along and then immediately running to deliver a premature baby … of
23 to 24 weeks. ‘I thought to myself how bizarre it was that I could
have legally dismembered this fetus-now-newborn if it were inside
its mother’s uterus,’ she writes, ‘but that the same kind of
violence against it now would be illegal, and unspeakable.’”
So what we
have seen so far is this: NRLC’s determined efforts to pass federal
and state legislation to ban partial-birth abortions has had an
enormous impact on the public’s attitude about abortion—and,
therefore, has saved hundreds of thousands, more likely millions, of
lives. The biological facts of life, as revealed by sonograms and
the science of fetal development, are on our side. Abortion doctors
know exactly what they are doing—but it takes a sort of
“schizophrenic” mind set to do it, either for profit or for the sake
of “progressive” ideology.
Dr. Harris’s
reflection “how bizarre it was that I could have legally dismembered
this fetus-now-newborn if it were inside its mother’s uterus, but
that the same kind of violence against it now [outside the womb]
would be illegal, and unspeakable” speaks of a deeper truth which
she hasn’t yet grasped—and we pray that she will.
That truth is exceptionally well
expressed by Kathryn Scharplaz (letter to the editor, November 2009
issue of First Things):
“[Those]
who think in harmony with the Church correctly perceive
that abortion profanes the very core of our faith, which is the
incarnation of God as a human being. God could have chosen to save
fallen man in any way he wanted, but he chose to do it by becoming
one of us. And he did not choose to appear suddenly as a fully
mature human—Almighty God chose to become incarnate as a tiny zygote
in Mary’s womb. God Himself, a human being like us! Part of what
makes the Good News so good is that the inherent dignity of human
beings can never again be in doubt. …
“To
accept abortion is to deny the very nature of man—and of God.
Killing a fellow human being at the same vulnerable, prenatal stage
at which Jesus’ earthly life began naturally seems more abominable
than anything else we can imagine. It is not only a violation of
justice and compassion but, at some level, a rejection of God’s
ineffable gift of intimacy with himself, which he has given us
precisely by means of his life as a fellow human being.”
We at NRLC
wish you a blessed Christmas! |