The only sure answer to stop violence against abortion facilities
and their providers would be to eliminate its basic cause, that is, to stop killing babies
inside. Since that isn’t going to happen in the near future, it is important to
closely examine such violence. How does abortion relate to violence in American society?
During a powerful speech at the February 1994 National Prayer Breakfast, Mother Teresa of
Calcutta said: "The greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a
war against the child . . . And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child,
how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"
We believe that sidewalk counselors have been a "protective
ring" around these facilities, and that legislative and judicial actions that have
drastically limited and even eliminated such "protective rings" have allowed
violence to escalate.
CONDEMN VIOLENCE
Your authors have seldom been a part of sidewalk counseling, but
have been anything but disinterested observers. My own (Dr. W’s) position has been
unequivocal condemnation of violence against the bricks and the persons in the abortion
industry. I have held no quarter for those who kill babies, but have consistently stated
that violence on the outside will never solve the violence inside. Also, while harboring
the deepest respect and admiration for those heroic souls who have satin, I have had real
reservations about some of their actions because of the negative public image it has
created for the pro-life movement.
THE BEGINNING
This being said, let us trace a bit of history. Back in the 1970s,
the practice of picketing in front of an abortion chamber began. It spread from location
to location, and then from Saturdays only (the heavy "kill days") to multiple
days in the week. By the ’80s, side-walk counseling, as it came to be more properly
called, was a common practice throughout the U.S.
In the early ’80s, fire-bombing reared its head. Using the
bully pulpit I had as president of National Right to Life during that time, I would look
directly into the lens and say, "If any of you are thinking of fire-bombing an
abortion place, please don’t. You will hurt the pro-life movement. You think you may
save some babies. For a few days, in some cases, you might, although those women may still
go elsewhere. What you will do is turn public opinion against our movement and delay the
day when we can finally stop the killing completely.
PEOPLE OF PEACE
"Remember, we are people of peace. Our basic ethic is to stop
violence, the violence that daily kills over 4,000 unborn babies. If we adopt their evil
ethic, violence, we gut our own. Remaining peaceful is the only way we will win the minds
and hearts of people." Others were saying much the same, and that message slowly got
through. Into the late ’80s, fire-bombing became much less frequent. We must remember
that such fire-bombing was always done at night, directed only against bricks, never
against persons.
SIT-INS
Then came the sit-ins. The participants were peaceful, nonviolent
and prayerful, adopting the tactics of Ghandi and Dr. Martin Luther King. The physical
beatings, jailing and punishment taken by the participants from police, was clear witness
to the deep dedication of those involved.
Is it pure coincidence, in the late 1980s when the sit-ins were at
their peak, that fire-bombings sank to their lowest levels? Is it a coincidence that by
the middle ’90s, with rescues beaten back by the courts, that such violent episodes
had quadrupled compared to 1988? These peaceful sit-ins, however, were publicized by the
national media as violent events, exactly the opposite
of what they actually were, e.g., a local peaceful sit-in, reported
in the paper often had a picture of a burned-out abortion mill (from a thousand miles
away) printed along-side of it.
SUPPRESSION
The abortion industry cried loudly in protest. Legislatures and
judges listened and the anti-sit-in juggernaut began to move. Jailing became more
frequent. Court-orders set boundaries. The high court ruled the RICO bill could be used.
The U.S. Congress passed the Freedom of Access to Clinics Act (FACE), making sit-ins a
federal felony. The result, to a significant extent, was to remove the "protective
ring" of sidewalk counselors that had been in front of those entrances. Then the
violence escalated from attacks on the persons of the abortionists, to random shootings;
from targeted reprisal to terrorist activity, as in Massachusetts.
WHY THE ESCALATION?
The question is, why the escalation? A moment’s reflection is
relevant. There are about 1,400 abortion facilities in the U.S. Abortion has been legal
nation-wide since 1973. Sidewalk counselors have witnessed in front of these kill centers
constantly during these years. There are intense emotional gut issues often involved in
the abortion decision and there are over 4,000 abortions daily. How often could not a
reaction to "her killing my baby" have caused a rejected, unstable boyfriend or
husband to literally go crazy over the frustration, loss and anger generated and result in
retaliation? But, incredibly, 35 million abortions, over all these years, at 1,400
locations have resulted in—(tragically)
—only five fatal retaliations (by this publication
date). This is a minuscule number considering the depth and power of the emotions
generated, and considering that we are looking back at hundreds of millions of man and
woman protest days. Truly the news that ought to be publicized is not that five adults
have been killed, but that there have been only five.
UNBELIEVABLY PEACEFUL
Rather than indicting our entire movement because of these
unbelievably few incidents, the media should be extolling the extraordinary peaceful,
nonviolent and prayerful aspects so characteristic of this movement, utterly unique in
history, as it is. Sadly, such an evaluation has not appeared in the secular media. The
analogy with the Black Panthers is worth recalling. Dr. Martin Luther King adopted
Gandhi’s method.
He insisted that the civil rights sit-ins and demonstrations be
peaceful. His supporters complied, except for the Black Panthers. This small group sought
the same goal, civil rights, but employed violent means. They killed people. But there is
a crucial difference today. Then the media nearly unanimously supported King’s
efforts. The Black Panthers were reported as a tiny extremist group not representative of
the civil rights movement.
In sharp contract, the media today is almost unanimously opposed to
the civil rights of the unborn. Also in sharp contrast, today’s violent extremists
have been held up as typical of the pro-life movement rather than the aberrant, atypical,
sick exceptions that they so obviously are.
WHO DID IT?
It is an obvious fact that almost all alleged assailants have been
mentally unstable and are not members of, nor representative of the pro-life movement.
Responsible leaders of the pro-life movement have unanimously and unequivocally condemned
such violence. These assailants may be anti-abortion, but they are not pro-life. All of
this having been said, however, why the up-surge of violence? There were just as many
babies being killed annually 10 and 15 years ago as today, but the violence today is
different. Why? To better understand this, let’s look at a few experiences in one
medium-size city.
Case 1. A distraught husband on the losing end of a furious
argument with his pregnant wife had been told by her that she was going to get the
abortion. He wanted his baby in the most profound fashion. He suspected she was getting
the abortion that day. He called the clinic. Was his wife there? They said,
"No." In fact, she was being aborted at that very time. When he discovered it,
the man simply "lost it." In a towering fit of anger, he went to the clinic to
get even. He was stopped by those in that "protective ring." They talked to him,
calmed him down, advised him against violence, prayed over him, with him, and then shared
his tears.
He cooled off. They accompanied him home.
Case 2. I spoke to a very dedicated father of five who has been
in front of one or another of Cincinnati’s abortion mills every Saturday for the last
twenty years.
He is a big man, very peaceful and religious. I asked him how many
times he himself had prevented violence over these years. He told me of several additional
instances.
Has it not been the same in other cities?
SIDEWALK COUNSELORS PROTECT
It is clear that this vital function of sidewalk counseling has not
been generally recognized. Yes, pro-lifers are there as a pro-life witness. Yes, they are
there to save babies. Yes, they are there to help women, before and after the abortion.
But they are also there to prevent violence. Their presence has been a "protective
ring." These peaceful, prayerful people have undoubtedly prevented hundreds, probably
even thousands of episodes of violence.
PRESSURE VALVE FUNCTIONED
There are many deeply dedicated pro-life people. Most feel, and
rightly so, that they have done their bit by volunteering to speak, counsel, write
letters, stuff envelopes, march in Washington, etc. But such efforts are not enough for
others. These folks feel deeply that they are called to use their own bodies to try to
stop this holocaust. Their reward is the baby and mother saved. They need a physical and
emotional outlet, and participation in sidewalk counseling for them is not merely
personally and spiritually fulfilling, but also functions as an emotional safety valve.
But, time went on. The fetal death toll mounted. The expectation of stopping abortion
began to fade, and for many, a more activist physical role was the response. This
manifested itself in thousands of people sitting-in. If there ever was a pressure valve,
an escape valve for emotions, sit-ins certainly provided it. How many know that over
70,000 such heroes and heroines have been peacefully arrested compared to less than 5,000
during the civil rights era?
PRESSURE VALVE SHUT OFF
But then the judicial and legislative screws were tightened. Sit-ins
were forbidden in a draconian fashion. The emotional pressure cooker, the frustration not
only continued but escalated while the pressure valve was effectively shut off.
Overwhelmingly, most pro-life people have directed their energies to other pro-life
activities, but a certain unstable few apparently have not. With this we have seen a new
escalation of violence, this time targeted at abortionists and tragically, even
indiscriminately against a few working in the abortion industry.
INFLAMMATORY RHETORIC?
And what of the abortion industry’s charges that our
"inflammatory rhetoric" is precipitating these new events? This is unmitigated
nonsense. It is not because we verbally accuse them of "killing babies" that
these tragedies have occurred. No, it is because they are brutally killing babies. Our
people are just telling the truth. The pro-abortion goal here is obvious. They want to
prevent us from informing people of the true nature of their "business."
Pro-lifers should see through this immediately.
There is no question why the abortion industry wants that
"protective ring" removed. It is bad for business, very bad for business. It has
caused them to lose untold dollars. But, having removed the "protective ring,"
they are now paying a certain price. Sadly, the pro-life movement is paying a far greater
price because of the portrayal of all pro-lifers by the media as terrorists.
WHO IS VIOLENT?
The real, ongoing violence is occurring inside the doors of the
abortion chambers. Killing of innocent babies is the ultimate violence, and it occurs
4,000 times every day in the United States.
WHO PICKETS?
Men, but mostly women, boys and girls, young and old of every race
and religion. They are heroes and heroines. They volunteer their time. They walk in the
rain and snow. They endure insults and sometimes assaults from the guards that the
abortion proprietors hire, and they take it — all in hope of saving one tiny life, in
the hope of preventing the physical and psychic damage to one woman.
And that is their reward. They sidewalk-counsel and picket
peacefully. When a woman goes through their line to enter, they will offer her literature
and help. In a quiet voice, they will say, "Please don’t kill your baby.
We’ll help you in any way you need. Won’t you let
us?"
But I’ve heard that the picketers threaten and sometimes physically
abuse the women.
In fact, it is the abortion chamber people who frequently do such
things. Pro-life picketers have been spit on, pushed, cursed, threatened, ridiculed, hit,
etc.
All they do is turn the other cheek. The only unwise thing that
we’ve heard occasionally has been shouting by picketers. This is unwise and probably
hasn’t saved many babies.
But this picketing does upset some women who have their minds firmly
made up. Is that good?
If these women had truly been informed of the full facts of fetal
development, of the hazards of induced abortion, and of all the alternatives, there would
be no need for picketing. Furthermore, a woman at peace with her choice for an abortion
would not be upset by pickets, pictures of babies, and attempted counseling.
Do you mean the picketers give information the women wouldn’t
get otherwise?
Yes. A good example is the fact that a heartbeat can be heard seven
or eight weeks after conception on an office ultrasonic stethoscope. Is this an important
bit of information? Should a pregnant mother know it?
In a series of 327 women at the University of Szeged, Hungary,
mothers who wanted abortions were allowed to listen to the "fetal heartbeat."
After hearing
