file: /pub/resources/text/ProLife.News/1993: PLN-0308.TXT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Life Communications - Volume 3, No. 8 April, 1993 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This Pro-Life Newsletter is intended to provide articles and news information to those interested in Pro-Life Issues. All submissions should be sent to the editor, Steve (frezza@ee.pitt.edu). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) Casey speaks out on National Health Care: In the first of his weekly radio addresses for April, Governor Robert Casey of Pennsylvania spoke out against the Clinton national health care plan now being proposed. He indicated that abortion services are being considered as part of the Clinton plan, and that its inclusion would be a "serious tactical blunder." Casey said, "They're talking about including abortion services in the basic health care package. I'm opposed to that, and a lot of other people are opposed to it." Casey said he believes that including abortion services would seriously undermine the administration's effort to get prompt response on the health care issue for all Americans. At the same time the Clinton administration is considering proposing a national health care plan, it is also seems to be paving the way for its passage: Casey said he would continue to oppose efforts to repeal the Hyde Amendment, the law that prohibits the use of federal money to pay for abortions. "The same court which said that abortion is a right has made it clear that government does not have to pay for the exercise of that right. It's as simple as that." Casey also commented that he disagrees strongly with the Clinton's decisions to permit the use of the French abortion pill RU-486, and to permit fetal tissue research. Both of these decisions were announced in January, when 20-60,000 Pro-Life demonstrators were in Washington to petition Congress and the Courts. The governor, who was refused permission to address the 1992 Democratic Convention on the abortion issue, also mentioned that he had written every member of Congress urging them to vote against the proposed Freedom of Choice Act. He called the act "a move in the Congress to cram down the throats of the people abortion-on-demand for the while country." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act On Feb. 3, 1993, Representative Schumer proposed a bill (HR796) before the House of Representatives "To assure freedom of access to [abortion] clinic entrances." It seems that blocking the entrance to an abortuary may now be raised to the status of a federal crime, on the same status as crimes like treason, but but not theft, rape or murder. "Whoever, with intent to prevent or discourage any person from obtaining reproductive health services, intentionally and physically obstructs, hinders, or impedes the ingress or egress of another to a medical facility that affects interstate commerce, or to the structure or place in which the medical facility is located, shall be subject to the penalties provided in subsection (b) of this section and the civil remedy provided in subsection (c) of this section." The penalties proposed in subsection (b) are: "(1) for not more than one year, in the case of a first conviction under this section; and (2) for not more than three years, in the case of an offender who has been convicted of a previous offense under this section;" The penalties proposed in subsection (c) state that the plaintiff may then pursue the accused in a civil court for "appropriate relief." The bill goes on to define this relief as "not punitive damages" but rather "treble the actual damages (and any such damages may include an award for pain and suffering and emotional distress), or damages in the amount of $5,000, whichever is greater;" and "any appropriate declaratory or injunctive", etc.. The bill then goes on to expressly exclude any similar conduct, such as that "protected by the first article of amendment to the Constitution", labor disputes, official governement duty, public utility workers, and agents of the medical facility. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Ivy League Coalition for Life Spring Conference The Ivy League Coalition for Life is sponsoring its semesterly conference at Wellesley College in Boston on April 24. A man from the Christian Action Council will be speaking, as will be Frederica Mathewes-Green, a leader in Feminists For Life. A third speaker is being lined up. All pro-life students from all schools are invited. For more information contact me at jem3@cornell.edu. - Jim McCloskey [ As i remember, there was an attempt by pro-abortion persons bussed in to help try to break up the last Ivy-League Coalition for Life conference. They were unsucessful (see articles in v3n2 and v2n19).] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) New Resources Added: "Contrived Publicity for the Abortion Pill" a detailed account of the medical implications of RU-486 use. From the November, 1992 "Medical Moral Newsletter" Excellent summary, with great references. News related to RU-486 from back issues of the newsletter has been appended for futher reference. [Ask for "RU-486".] "Et Tu, Justice Kennedy?" a commentary and legal assesment by Russell Hittinger. Discusses what really happened in the Casey vs Planned Parenthood (1992) decision from a conservative, Catholic viewpoint. Very informative as to the workings of the Court, the aftermath of the decision, and the implications that Casey may have on future Supreme Court rulings. [Ask for "RusselHittinger".] "Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act" - the text of the bill proposed before the 103rd Congress to "assure freedom of access to clinic entrances." See article two for a summary. [Ask for "HR796".] For an up-to-date listing of all available resources, ask for "v3Topics". ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) READER QUESTIONS I'm looking for help on answering some of the "tough" abortion questions like the ever-so popular, "what if the woman cannot afford to take care of a child" or "what if the baby is a genetic 'defect'"? While I condemn abortions for either of these reasons, I am still formulating arguments against them. Thanks! -Jason Highsmith [ The deformation clause: First, realize that if that child is born, we as a society have already decided that not allowing that child access to schools, jobs, etc. is criminal discrimination. How do physical and mental handicaps determine the humanity of the little one (fetus)? The child is no more or less human because of its age, size, mental or physical handicaps. Aborting the child because it is deformed _is_ discrimination against the handicaped. In this same light, abortion is simply another form of age discrimination, and a very final form of it. The deformation clause hits at people's emotions, and at a very subtle but important idea: we are human if we look human - the more human we are is based on how normal we are - the more adult we are - so the definition of humanity, of what makes us a person with inalienable rights becomes a line that we draw based on extrinsic (external) properties, completely ignoring the intrinsic ones. Following extrinsic articles, it is easy to argue that the handicaped, the aged, blacks, gypsies, jews, the poor, or anyone is not 'fully human' and has only limited, if any rights. The argument hits at people's emotions because raising a handicaped (deformed) child can be a daunting prospect, and many give in to the argument that these children are better off dead than alive - but are they? Why? Is our answer to someones suffering to kill that person? Or better yet to deny they are a person, so we can feel more at ease about 'terminating' them? ] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) READER RESPONSES Re: v3n6 The Pensacola Killing I am still trying to supress negative feelings given the killing of the abortionist in Florida. The article in there is correct, that a "pro-lifer", as opposed to a mere "anti-abortionist", must be quick to distance himself from such an action and assert that this is not what being "pro-life" means. We can try to dismiss this action as the result of someone "on the fringe", but I think the pro-life movement as a whole must really re-examine itself and question itself on what a consistent life ethic is about, and what it means to show compassion and support to those involved. It is true that the media did in fact print all the quotes from people not quick to condemn the action. However, those quoted are not on the "fringe," but the very leaders of groups such as OR, Rescue America and certain church groups who could not come out and say that this was wrong. They said things like, "this may dissuade others from performing abortions," or "while this action is regrettable, we know that lives will also be saved because of it." A fundamentalist minister went so far as to assert that this action was "just," given the sin that was committed. Even people who said that it was wrong did so while passing judgement on the doctor --"he died before he had a chance to repent, so his soul may be condemned forever." Great expression of love, no? And members of Rescue America took up a collection for, not the VICTIM's family, but the alleged KILLER's family, knowing that he will face "hardships". I have long felt dismayed by the tactics used by certain elements of the pro-life movement; I have often seen manipulation, harassment, and moral bullying of people involved, including of dejected women in the situation they are in, of the doctors who perform the abortions (and often their entire families), and of women who merely happened to be passing by an abortion clinic on their way to work. Even children are used as pawns in OR's war. And to parade around a jar containing an aborted fetus does little to uphold the sanctity of life (wouldn't a more appropriate thing to do be to give the child a funeral and proper burial?). I find this behavior inconsistent with the concept of a life ethic, and far removed from the love and support we claim to want to show. The lukewarm response to this murder really bothers me. It would appear that prominent leaders of the prolife movement are too wrapped up in what they are doing to see this senseless murder as being just as wrong and deplorable as the senseless abortions that are performed daily. They are too convinced, apparently, that being on the right side excuses whatever actions taken. They are too consumed in hatred for the abortionists to be able to treat them with the compassion they deserve. I agree that pro-lifers must distance themselves from this type of action and the "fringe" associated with it. However, I would suggest that we look at groups like OR and Rescue America and relegate THEM to fringe status, re- evaluating what we mean when we say "pro-life," and what tactics we use. - Mike VanAuker -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Re: v3n6 The Pensacola Killing In two issues back, the article which rightfully denounced the killing of David Gunn also stated that Griffin was a member of Operation Rescue. But from what I have heard elsewhere, Griffin belonged to no pro-life organi- zation. Which is true? I think it is very important to clear this up. OR gets enough flack from our society already; any association with Griffin would only make things worse for them. -Rose Recchia [ From what i have seen, Griffin was/is not a member of either Operation Rescue or Rescue America - ed.] -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- This response is a bit personal, but perhaps it will help us all to understand what it's like to experience an unwanted pregnancy. We need to truly empathize with those seeking abortions if we're ever going to reach them. It's so easy to assume that they're all insensitive, carefree "pro- choicers" when that's not usually the case. Re: v3n6 Editorial "No woman wants an abortion as she wants an ice cream cone or a Porsche. She wants an abortion as an animal caught in a trap wants to gnaw off its own leg." This is so true! I think the analogy of an animal gnawing off its own leg is one of the best I've heard so far. Unfortunately, I speak from experience. (Please note that I do not write this in order to excuse abortions, merely to try to help others understand what it's like from this point of view). I was a college freshman in 1975. When I graduated high school, my father and stepmother informed me that I must go away to college - didn't matter where, just go. So, I found myself in Texas, 1500 miles from home. Like most freshmen, I suppose, I was a little scared, and a whole lot lonely. Being rather naive, it wasn't long before I found myself pregnant - and a whole lot more scared and lonely. I remember the fear, the sheer panic, of those days. I had always been terrified of my father; no way could I envision telling him of my plight. The baby's father, by this time, had moved on to another "relationship". All I could think of was how desperately I wanted it all to be over! I figured I could deal with any guilt feelings later. (Wrong!) I wish I had the words to describe the desperation I felt, especially between December 5th, when I learned I was definitely pregnant, and December 10th, when I killed my baby. Picture yourself as the victim of Freddy Krueger, or some other horror movie villain, running for your life; perhaps that will give you some idea of the fear. And yet, I never let on to those around me. Of my friends and acquaintances, only the baby's father ever knew I was pregnant. To the people in the campus health clinic and the abortion clinic, I must have seemed to be making a calm, reasoned choice. My roommate seemed to sense that I was somewhat depressed, yet nothing more. Inside, I was barely maintaining my sanity. So, like the animal in the steel-jawed trap, I "chewed off my leg". Like that animal, I never realized what a painful, maimed life I would have afterwards. (Actually, the animal in the trap has the better deal: his pain is merely physical.) To all those of you who participate in rescues, counseling, or other means of persuading women to choose life (and especially those who offer concrete, practical assistance): Thank you. I wish someone like you had been there 18 years ago. I'm glad you're there now. - A lady who wishes to remain anonymous ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote of the Month: "The issue of protecting unborn human life is the defining issue of our generation...[The abortion issue] is very much like the slavery issue was in 1860. It is an issue that tests our basic value systems...Without life, all other civil rights are meaningless and irrelevant." - Robert Casey(D) Governor of Pennsylvania +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Credits: | | 3 - Many thanks to reader Chris Bord, who provided a copy of HR 796. | |QOM- From the Feb. 1993 Newsletter of Pennsylvanians fo Human Life, Wyoming | | Valley Chapter, 201 South Main St. Wilkes-Barre, PA 18702 Many thanks | | to reader Andy Sicree. | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ Anyone desiring information on specific prolife groups, literature, tapes, or help with problems is encouraged to contact the editor.