1) Initially, the anti-abortion movement was not even thought of as a religious issue. Evangelicals during this time period strongly believed in rapture theology, or “the belief that the Second Coming of Christ was close at hand” (Risen and Thomas, Pg. 81). They believed that because the End Times was so imminent, there was no use in worrying about the mortal events of earth. Also, some believed that before the Coming of Christ, there would be the rise of the Antichrist who would bring chaos and darkness (Risen and Thomas Pg. 81). This chaos should not be interfered with because it was a prerequisite to the return of Christ. Some Christians saw the legalization of abortion in Roe v. Wade and the prevalence of it thereafter as an inevitable part of this process, and as a result most Protestant fundamentalists during the 1970s stayed out of the pro-life movement. Abortion was seen as a Catholic issue. However, activists like Schaeffer were soon urging Protestants to return to the views of Reformation theologians such as Calvin and Knox. The view of these followers was that God did not want them to sit idly by, but instead wanted them to make the world a more righteous place by whatever means necessary. As Risen and Thomas state, “it was appropriate for the godly man to take the law into his own hands, because his hands were the tools of the Lord.” This revival in Calvinist thinking persuaded many Protestant fundamentalist into taking up the fight against abortion. Religion soon became a factor in the pro-life movement.
The movement began with political involvement, peaceful rallies, handing out pamphlets, and the creation of over three thousand crisis pregnancy centers across the country by 1981 ( Thomas and Risen Pg. 84). One of the main organizations of the movement was John O’Keefe’s Pro-Life Non-Violent Action Project. O’Keefe’s tactics involved civil disobedience, such as clinic sit-ins and prayer vigils, and the recruitment of leading activists, priests, and ministers. One of PNAP’s greatest achievements came in 1984 with a sit-in at the
However, some, such as Michael Bray and Thomas Spinks, became frustrated by the ineffectiveness and slowness of the current state of the movement. Destruction of abortion clinic property and bombings began to take place across the nation, with the belief in mind that it was acceptable to God as long as no human life was injured in the process. These violent actions seriously hurt the anti-abortion movement, especially the PNAP. Two days after O’Keefe’s sit-in, the
Protest campaigns now included an alliance of Catholics and Christians. Many of these campaigns began to unite behind their belief that clinic bombers and abortionist murderers should be freed from jail, such as the “Free Joan Andrews” campaign (Risen and Thomas Pg. 187). These cases put the spotlight on the movement to a much greater degree than O’Keefe’s efforts had, and the movement began to rapidly grow. “When early leaders such as O’Keefe and Lee began to fade away, so did their theories about ‘a peaceful presence.’ Instead, it was the street-level aggressiveness of Joan Andrews, combined with the harsh rhetoric of Joseph Scheidler that began to spread” (Risen and Thomas Pg. 192). Graffiti was drawn on clinics, the doors were superglued shut, and noxious gas was spread throughout the clinic while patients were inside. Vandalism was the new tactic.
After years of Republican control of the government, pro-life activists were not content with the results. Randall Terry argued that after 6 years, the fight against abortion had not seen any significant gains. Reagan had not come through on his promise to end abortion. If Democrats won the 1988 election, it could be guaranteed that the anti-abortion movement would continue to make no ground. Terry proposed a national protest campaign to take place with the presidential race, again putting abortion on the front burner. Terry’s campaign was radical, encouraging followers to “storm abortion clinics; solder shut elevators and blockade doors so that police could not reach them; and completely trash clinic offices” (Risen and Thomas Pg. 207). Terry was approached by many people asking him to tone it down, and he soon dropped his radical ideas. Activists were not ready for that level of radicalism yet.
However, the anti-abortion protests gradually came closer and closer to actual harassment, and the shopping centers that housed abortion clinics were boycotted. The actual impact was still negligible. Abortions were on the rise. 1984 saw 1.57 million abortions, an increase of thousands over four years (Risen and Thomas Pg. 240). Boycotts now included hospitals that performed abortions, and out of town abortionists became the new target of protestors. As a result, the clinics became more aggressive, employing clinic escorts, and fights began to break out outside the clinics. It was not long before radicals began rushing the clinics, locking themselves in the procedure rooms, and chaining themselves to a sink, all to keep abortions from happening for that day.
After the
In the 1990’s the anti-abortion movement took a dark turn. In 1993 abortion doctor David Gunn was murdered by Michael Griffin in
2) McVeigh and Sikkink argue that four main factors lead to Protestant approval of contentious actions, which include “volunteering for church organizations, a perception that religious values are being threatened, a belief that individuals should not have a right to deviate from Christian moral standards, and a belief that humans are inherently sinful” (McVeigh and Sikkink Pg. 1425). Also, religious beliefs that depict life as a struggle between good and evil can lead to the acceptance of controversial tactics.
On July 29, 1994, Paul Hill, a Protestant fundamentalist, murdered Dr. John Britton, an abortion doctor, and one of his clinic escorts, James Barrett, while injuring the other, June Barrett. Hill was an avid supporter of Michael Griffin’s homicide of abortionist Dr. Gunn, and after the murder he went on various television shows declaring that it was justifiable homicide. He was a strong advocate of anti-abortion violence. Hill stated that he has no remorse about killing and injuring the clinic escorts, because they were enabling the abortion doctor. Upon being arrested, Hill’s words were that “no innocent babies are going to be killed in that clinic today” (Risen and Thomas Pg. 365). Hill was deeply involved in religious organizations, to the point that it was his livelihood. He believed that Christian moral standards are universal. Whether you are religious or not, you should adhere to these morals. There is no doubt that Hill believed his values to be threatened with the continued increase in abortions, and in his eyes, the death of innocent babies. Hill fits McVeigh and Sikkink’s model of someone who would approve of radical actions exactly.
3)
News Accounts Presaged Trouble
By ROBERT D. McFADDEN. New York Times (1857-Current file).
Pensacola Trial to Be First Test for Clinic Access Law
By RONALD SMOTHERSSpecial to The New York Times. New York Times (1857-Current file).
The first article, News Accounts Presaged Trouble, is very brief and doesn’t give a lot of detail concerning the actual events that took place with Britton’s murder. The article discusses Hill’s past, bringing up his appearance on “The Phil Donahue Show”, “Nightline”, and CNN, and stating how on all of these shows he defended the homicide of Dr. Gunn. A majority of the article deals with another article: “The Abortionist” in February 1994’s edition of GQ magazine. It was explained that in this article Paul Hill, Dr. John Bayard Britton, James Barrett, and June Barrett were all mention, and how this was extremely ominous foreshadowing. The actual double homicide that took place the day before this article was written is only briefly mentioned once in the article, with little detail given to what occurred.
The second article, Pensacola Trial to Be First Test for Clinic Access Law, focuses more on the trial of Paul Hill. The charges against Hill are mentioned, but again, very briefly. It is stated that Hill is the first person to be tried under the Federal Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances law, which was designed to reduce violent protests outside of abortion clinics. This article was written just before the trial took place, and therefore the outcome would not have been known at the time.
The New York Times’ account of Dr. Britton’s murder by Paul Hill is much less focused on the details of the actual event compared to Risen and Thomas’s account. This may be due to the fact that the details of Britton’s homicide were simply not available to the public, or where unknown to the police themselves, at the time of the articles’ authorship. Risen and Thomas are extremely detailed in their account of the homicide, taking you through Hill’s preparations throughout the day, step by step, not forgetting any slight detail. This difference could also be contributed to the fact that newspaper articles have to fill a certain space in the paper. The cannot be any longer or shorter than the space they are allotted. Because of this, the details may have been cut to save space. Also, The New York Times gave much more focus to Hill’s trial than Risen and Thomas did.
No comments:
Post a Comment