I wrote this paper for a special topic English class my freshman year of college on activism. With another historic March for Life yesterday, I thought this would be a great time to post it on my blog. Enjoy!
America is a nation of activism built on activism. Two hundred thirty-nine years ago the founding fathers decided it was time for a change, an end of the abuse from King George III. They campaigned, fought, and won the American Revolution granting the United States independence from Great Britain. That same activist spirit that granted independence to our nation lives on still today and throughout our history. Abolitionism, Woman’s Suffrage, and Civil Rights are just a few of the many movements that have rocked the nation since 1776. The Pro-life movement, which simply stated believes abortion to be an injustice, is another activist movement that has gained support in the United States over the years. The Pro-life
movement, which was once just a moral ideal of few, has become the large movement of today, which works to reform national laws regarding abortion and gain favor within society. The prolife movement, like any movement, has history with some iniquitous events, shifts in overall organization, as well as values that help people understand the movement and its growth up to today as well as where it may go in the future.
Before Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton
The United States government did not always have abortion laws, but like many other existing laws, the people felt a need for reform and created policy to make that reform happen. Beginning in the nineteenth century people, mainly physicians, were concerned about the regulation of abortions due to the risks that came with the procedure (Borgmann 279). A major component of the movement even at this time was the morality of abortion. Slowly but surely laws popped up state by state regarding abortion and the role of physicians in the procedure, most with the opinion that abortions should be limited and only done in extreme cases (Mooney and Lee 602). The issue though was not in the public eye until a, “1962 case of a Phoenix television personality who was denied an abortion even though she had ingested thalidomide [a poison known to cause birth defects] thrust the issue into the consciousness of the public and helped define the debate in moral term” (Mooney and Lee 603). The case caused the development of rhetoric regarding the issue and different positions surrounding the issue. The Catholic Church issued the “Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern Word-Gaudium Et Spes” a part of the Second Vatican Council in 1965, which discussed abortion as an “unspeakable crime” as it violates life (Vatican no. 51). The National Conference of Catholic Bishops (now known as the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops or USCCB) created the National Right to Life committee at the 1967 annual conference in order to launch an official political fight against the legalization of abortion (Borgmann 251). Many people shared the view of the Church that abortion was morally wrong, though they may have disagreed as to why it was morally wrong. In addition, others had a different view that abortion was a right important to Woman’s equality in the nation. All of these events resulted in the push for abortion laws, and an increased amount of resistance from pro-life activists.
Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton
Jane Roe, whose real name was Norma McCorvey, was the woman with the case to change it all, unintentionally changing the abortion laws of the entire nation in one sweep. A Texas mother who unexpectedly found herself pregnant again, Norma sought an abortion. She lied that she was raped in an effort to obtain a legal abortion in Texas. When she decided to meet with an attorney, her goal was to obtain a legal abortion not to change abortion laws. Years later she gave a testimony regarding the case in which she said, “Since all these lies succeeded in dismantling every state's protection of the unborn child, I think it's fair to say that the entire abortion industry is based on a lie,” and, “Sarah never mentioned women using abortions as a form of birth control. We talked about truly desperate and needy women, not women already wearing maternity clothes” (“Testimony of Norma McCorvey”). McCorvey died still fighting for the right-to-life in America which, “invalidated forty-six states' abortion laws” (Borgmann 252).
The lesser known companion case to Roe was Doe v. Bolton. It too caused major reform to abortion laws although was another case where the plaintiff later advocated for the overruling of the case. Sandra Cano, under the alias Mary Doe, supposedly filed a complaint along with her husband in 1970 regarding the abortion laws in Georgia preventing her from getting an abortion if she became pregnant. Cano was believed to suffer from a “neuro-chemical” disorder that required her to not take contraception or bring a pregnancy to term (Skelton). The problem is the whole story seems to be manufactured as Cano later came forward and testified against the allegations made. All Sandra Cano wanted was to divorce her husband and obtain custody of her three children. She said in a later testimony, “One of the Justices of the Supreme Court said during oral argument in my case "What does it matter if she is real or not." Well I am real and it does matter. I was in court under a false name and lies” (“Testimony of Sandra Cano”).
For many the credibility of both women’s later testimonies could be in question, but regardless the truth lies in the fact that these women were involved in the major cases that caused abortion law reform in the United States and later were major players in pro-life advocacy. Allan Parker who represented both women when they moved to overrule the decisions said, “Doe v. Bolton and Roe v. Wade are "the two cases that brought abortion to America," adding that "for the first time in the history of the United States, people who won landmark decisions want to go back to the Supreme Court and say, 'We were wrong’” (“In The Courts | 'Mary Doe' of Doe v. Bolton Files Motion To Overturn Companion Case to Roe v. Wade”). Two major cases from two different states regarding two separate women whose lives were forever changed by one Supreme Court decision that they both fought against till their last breath. They could have been the figure heads and the heart of the pro-choice movement but instead risked everything even their credibility to express their pro-life beliefs.
From Roe v. Wade and Doe vs. Bolton to Turn of the Century
After the Supreme Court issued the decision on Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, many different pro-life groups arose taking two different approaches in how to best promote their cause going forward: peaceful protest, and violent meetings. Just a mere decade since the main events of the Civil Rights movement took place the Pro-life movement found themselves at a loss. Abortion was just legalized throughout the country, and their cause seemed to be losing support rather than gaining. As “Roe v. Wade’s 40th Anniversary: A Moment of Truth for the Anti-Abortion-Rights Movement?” describes, the pro-life movement did a one eighty in a matter of twenty-four hours (Borgmann 252). January 21, 1973 abortion laws were state by state. Twenty-four hours later abortion was made legal throughout the nation. The movement which was previously fighting to maintain laws restricting access to abortion, was all of the sudden fighting for the rights of the unborn. The overall consensus between pro-life advocates was to continue the peaceful protests.
Though in the summer of 1989 the city of West Hartford, Connecticut found themselves at the center of a different kind of protest. Similar to those who protested in the Civil rights movement years before, the protestors decided to employ the technique of civil disobedience by occupying the office of the Summit Women’s Center. The protests, which grew in size and violence, once even escalating to bombing, eventually resulting in a court case. In this case the judge, “drew the line of legitimate anti-abortion protests at the point where they caused property damage or civil disruption,” and barred protestors from entering the facility (Rogers 31). This is just one of the many cases where pro-life people took extreme measures for the sake of their beliefs which is why there are restrictions on protestors today.
The March for Life on the other hand was a peaceful annual protest by members of the pro-life movement
that followed the Supreme Court’s ruling. Beginning on the first anniversary of the legalization of abortion throughout America, thousands of people have marched on the capitol every year. The march continues growing in size every year despite threats of snow storms. Norma McCorvey and Sandra Cano both made appearances at the event over the years (“History of the March for Life”).
Following the ruling in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, the pro-life movement was still a progressive movement for the time. Many people in the South who protested in the Civil Rights movement also supported the pro-life cause. Richard Hughes quotes an article from socialist and pacifist periodicals that said:
Our reaction to scenes of antiabortion activists engaging in civil disobedience outside abortion clinics is probably similar to many on the left: 'What are they doing using our tactics?' One major factor may be uncomfortable for many of us to admit; many of them are us. (22)
Unlike today where majority of the pro-life supporters are members of the republican party or lean more conservative, the pro-life movement of the past comprised of a much more diverse and yet evenly balanced group.
Pro-Life Stance on Abortion Today
The prolife movement operates on the idea that abortion is one of the greatest forms of violence legal today. Charles Bellinger said, “That pro-life structural foundation needs to be articulated more carefully, more thoroughly, and with greater anthropological insight than it has been in the past” (282). He continues on to layout a beautiful argument as to the goal of the pro-life movement. In short, our society is guilty of “othering.” We tend to separate ourselves from other groups because we feel superior or inferior to them and it harms both ourselves and those we separate from. Many people do this with embryos saying they are not persons or they are merely a clump of cells. It is the pro-life movement’s view that in this othering we reduce the value and importance of a human embryo, or a human at a younger age than ourselves and therefore permit the aborbon of that life.
Another point of view comes from celebrity Joy Villa, who made a statement with her ‘Choose Life’ outfit at the Grammy’s. Abortion is not the only option women have today. There are thousands of women’s pregnancy care centers across the country who can help women who want to keep their child, or give it up for adoption. In the article she discusses her personal experience having an open adoption after becoming pregnant at age twenty. She ends her article with a message that really embodies the whole movement:
Consider adoption. Consider life. Consider carrying your baby to term, and placing your unborn child with a caring, nurturing, happy family.
You will survive this. You will make it through. And you absolutely, 100 percent, deserve all the happiness and love in the world. You’re so much stronger than you know.
You deserve a second chance at life... and your baby deserves a first chance. Life is precious. And so are you. (Villa)
The Future
The movement today advocates for the repeal of Roe v. Wade and Doe vs. Bolton, which does not mean that abortion will be illegal throughout the nation. The major thing to remember is that, “The Supreme Court does not decide what conduct is illegal, only what conduct can be made illegal” (Linton 346). Pro-choice advocates fear that the tables will turn once again if these cases are overturned, but that is not exactly the case. As stated previously, abortion was illegal or restricted in forty-six states. Today, thirty-three of those have repealed their laws which would keep abortion legal within their states should Roe v. Wade be overturned. Four states have placed post-Roe laws to make abortion illegal once again in this event. Seven states would revert to their pre-Roe laws prohibiting all or most abortions. Linton concludes these statistics with the fact that, “In sum, no more than eleven States would have enforceable laws on the books prohibiting most or all abortions if Roe were overruled” (348).
Further studies in science and law will also influence how the prolife movement argues their point, especially in discussion with prochoice people. While many prolife people believe life begins at conception and a fetus is a person, when it comes to science and the law it is still up for debate. Neonatology has improved by leaps and bounds just in the last decade. Operations can be done on fetuses in the womb. Activist Ashley McGuire said, “when you’re seeing a baby sucking its thumb at 18 weeks, smiling, clapping,” it becomes “harder to square the idea that that 20-week-old, that unborn baby or fetus, is discardable” (Green). In law, people are recognizing it is up to the judge’s discretion when it comes to the interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s usage of the word ‘person’ and to whether the unborn are also protected (Craddock). Depending on how these areas develop, the prolife movement could change drastically.
Conclusion
The pro-life movement since its inception has worked towards protective rights of the unborn. There were times in our country where this idea was favored. Many times the pro-choice movement held the popular opinion instead. Maybe it is time for discussion between advocates for both sides. The American people
seem to have arrived at a stalemate, a near perfect split between the two stances. As Daniel Williams so eloquently put it, “Most scholars who have discussed the question have blamed the continued controversy on a “clash of absolutes”—a fundamental difference in moral or religious worldviews, often exacerbated by partisan conflict” (43). Since 1973 the movement has worked towards overruling the absolute legality of abortion in America. After forty-five years, it is time to make a change and decide to reform the nation’s laws surrounding abortion once again.
Works Cited
Bellinger, Charles K. "The Use of Historical Analogies in the Abortion Debate." Catholic Social Science Review, vol. 22, Jan. 2017, pp. 281-290. EBSCOhost, libproxy.ung.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=124789130&site=ehost-live.
Borgmann, Caitlin E. "Roe V. Wade's 40Th Anniversary: A Moment of Truth for the Anti- Abortion-Rights Movement?." Stanford Law & Policy Review, vol. 24, no. 1, Jan. 2013, pp. 245-270. EBSCOhost, libproxy.ung.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=88954111&site=ehost-live.
Bruno, Jeff. “Crowds at the March for Life in Washington DC on Jan 27 2017.” Patheos, Patheos, 3 Oct. 2017, www.patheos.com/blogs/catholicnews/2017/10/love-saves-lives-theme-of-the-2018-march-for-life/.
Craddock, Joshua J. "Protecting Prenatal Persons: Does the Fourteenth Amendment Prohibit Abortion?." Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, vol. 40, no. 2, May 2017, pp. 539-572. EBSCOhost, libproxy.ung.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=123288869&site=ehost-live.
Green, Emma. “Science Is Giving the Pro-Life Movement a Boost.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 18 Jan. 2018, www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/01/pro-life-pro-science/549308/.
“History of the March for Life.” March For Life, March for Life Education & Defense Fund, marchforlife.org/history-of-the-march-for-life/.
Hughes, Richard L. "The Civil Rights Movement of the 1990S?": The Anti-Abortion Movement and the Struggle for Racial Justice." Oral History Review, vol. 33, no. 2, Summer/Fall2006, pp. 1-23. EBSCOhost, libproxy.ung.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=22837717&site=ehost-live.
“In The Courts | 'Mary Doe' of Doe v. Bolton Files Motion To Overturn Companion Case to Roe v. Wade.” Kaiser Network, Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, 27 Aug. 2003, web.archive.org/web/20070927210121/http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?hint=2&DR_ID=19558.
Linton, Paul Benjamin. "Overruling Roe V. Wade: The Implications for the Law." Issues in Law & Medicine, vol. 32, no. 2, Fall2017, pp. 341-351. EBSCOhost, libproxy.ung.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=125384612&site=ehost-live.
Mooney, Christopher Z. and Mei-Hsien Lee. "Legislating Morality in the American States: The Case of Pre-Roe Abortion Regulation Reform." American Journal of Political Science, vol. 39, no. 3, Aug. 1995, p. 599. EBSCOhost, libproxy.ung.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9508231820&site=ehost-live.
“Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern Word-Gaudium Et Spes.” Vatican, The Catholic Church, www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_cons_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html.
Rogers, Donald W. "The Summit Women's Center Protest of 1989: Connecticut's Modern Clash over Women's Rights." Connecticut History, vol. 51, no. 1, Spring2012, pp. 16-39. EBSCOhost, libproxy.ung.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=78045896&site=ehost-live.
Saad, Lydia. “Americans' Identification With Abortion Labels.” Gallup News, Gallup, 9 June 2017, news.gallup.com/poll/211901/abortion-attitudes-stable-no-consensus-legality.aspx?g_source=link_NEWSV9&g_medium=TOPIC&g_campaign=item_&g_content=U.S.%2520Abortion%2520Attitudes%2520Stable%3b%2520No%2520Consensus%2520on%2520Legality.
Skelton, Chris. “Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).” Justia Law, Justia Law, supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/case.html.
“Testimony of Norma McCorvey.” EndRoe.org, National Committee for a Human Life Amendment, endroe.org/mccorveytestimony.aspx.
“Testimony of Sandra Cano.” EndRoe.org, National Committee for a Human Life Amendment, endroe.org/sandracanotestimony.aspx.
Williams, Daniel K. "No Happy Medium: The Role of Americans’ Ambivalent View of Fetal Rights in Political Conflict over Abortion Legalization." Journal of Policy History, vol. 25, no. 1, Jan. 2013, pp. 42-61. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1017/S0898030612000346.
Villa, Joy. “Joy Villa: Why I Choose Life over Abortion -- The Incredible Journey That Began for Me at 20.” Fox News, FOX News Network, 31 Jan. 2018, www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/01/31/joy-villa-why-choose-life-over-abortion-incredible-journey-that-began-for-me-at-20.html.
Comments