- Overall, the anti-abortion movement shifted from a focus on non-violent civil disobedience to violent extremism, especially as the core protesting organizations changed. John O’Keefe and the earlier Catholic protesters believed in a “merciful. . . Christ” (Risen and Thomas 78) and thus pursued and encouraged peaceful protest. However, when intensely religious Protestant fundamentalists such as Michael Bray began to make abortion into a fundamentalist issue, they approached it from the standpoint of believing in predestination and an “angry…wrathful Son of God” (Risen and Thomas 78). As the fundamentalists began joining the peaceful clinic sit-ins of civil disobedience protest organizations such as the Pro-Life Non-Violent Action Project, a rift in ideas formed. Many fundamentalists began to crave and take an aggressive approach toward stopping abortion, as they soon felt that sit-ins and disobedience were not doing enough to bring God’s judgment and justice upon the sinful “murderers” who got or gave abortions. Their goals became more “ambitious and brazen” (Risen and Thomas 90) and their tactics became more militant and violent, including clinic chain-ins and vandalism (including lock-gluing), spreading noxious fumes within the building, clinic bombings, and eventually, the shooting of abortion doctors. As peaceful tactics became overshadowed by militant and violent ones, new anti-abortion leaders took over, generally without permission, as spokespeople for the organizations founded by the peaceful protest leaders. This understandably caused more difficulty for the “public and media” in telling the “difference between” peaceful protesters and the increasing base of radical and violent protesters (Risen and Thomas 94). On top of this, the only media attention that was given to the anti-abortion movement was when a radical protester used showy and violent tactics that caused her or his arrest and/or the destruction of property or a human life. Therefore, this could be one of the factors that caused the movement to morph into violence and extremism, where no attention would be given to it otherwise. Especially after witnessing the events of Joan Andrews in Pensacola and her disobedience while in prison, people became more daring and extreme in their protesting of abortion and fundamentalists and Catholics found common ground (Risen and Thomas 188). Her actions and publicized arrest encouraged others such as John Burt, Michael Griffin, and Rachelle Shannon to make a real impact and to act violently against all who were involved in the abortion process. This marked the changing face of the anti-abortion movement into a radical and violent force which called for public attention. With the “martyrization” of violent protesters and the attention that came to be paid to violent and destructive acts, the number of extremist protesters and organizations of the movement, acting on what they deemed to be “God’s will” or “God’s justice” on earth, grew and came to the foreground, confusing public opinion of the anti-abortion movement between the peaceful and non-violent groups that used to dominate the scene and the violent, extremist groups that pulled down and destroyed the movement.
- McVeigh and Sikkink seem to have found through their survey data that religious identity, “a lot” of church and some protest participation, and the belief in a tense relationship between God and the world including emphasis on the idea that humans are sinners, are factors that make one more likely to accept “contentious tactics” in protest acts than other Christians (McVeigh and Sikkink 1449). Michael Griffin happens to posses a number of these characteristics that McVeigh and Sikkink have connected to the acceptance of “contentious actions.” At one point in his life, Griffin became deeply associated with the Brownsville Assembly of God, a church which was instrumental in the “fundamentalist revival” (Risen and Thomas 340-341), and later became a part of John Burt’s fundamentalist church, Whitfield Assembly of God (Risen and Thomas 343). This particular religious identification (the fundamentalist and evangelical) is the one that, statistically, is the most likely to be related to cases of people who approve of such “contentious tactics,” (McVeigh and Sikkink 1449) and Griffin obviously did, having murdered abortion doctor David Gunn. Interestingly, though, other factors appear to have swayed Griffin into violent protest actions. He was mentally/emotionally unstable to begin with, having allegedly abused his wife and tried to kidnap his children from her custody (Risen and Thomas 341). This and his response to the power of anti-abortion images and propaganda are also key factors unrelated to any data gathered in the McVeigh and Sikkink survey that would no doubt influence his attitude toward “contentious” behavior and violence. After watching the “graphic” anti-abortion film The Hard Truth, Griffin was so affected that he felt shocked into the realization of what abortion really was and that he should do something to prevent it, as God would want (Risen and Thomas 341). Also, Griffin participated in church activities, one of the other characteristics that McVeigh and Sikkink link to the approval of “contentious actions.” Griffin sat in the front row during services and addressed the congregation to ask for a prayer request for the soul of David Gunn, to get him to “stop killing babies” (Risen and Thomas 343). While this is not intense involvement in a church activity, it certainly reflects Griffin’s active participation in the church, which shows his willingness to take charge and act on his thoughts and beliefs, as one would have to in order to stand during a service and make such a direct statement in request. Through his fundamentalist beliefs in a wrathful and angry God who is pitted against the sinful world, the influence of powerful anti-abortion propaganda films and images, aggressive church participation, and the influence of a spiritual leader such as John Burt, whose protest participation was great and violent (and perhaps a bit of mental instability), Michael Griffin possesses the characteristics that McVeigh and Sikkink found from their survey to be connected to the approval by a Protestant to “contentious tactics” in protest of an issue, here the issue being anti-abortion activism. So violent and publicly attention-drawing was Griffin’s murder of David Gunn that he is pinned with “flushing the extremist fringe” of the anti-abortion movement “out into the open” and destroying all “credibility or influence” of the movement through nonviolent means (Risen and Thomas 344).
- The Risen and Thomas interpretation of the June and December bombings of the Ladies Center by Matthew Goldsby and James Simmons details more of the religious justification for and reasons as to why the men felt as if they needed to bomb the Center. It explains from a more personal standpoint than the Times articles do the background stories of the young men and makes it out to be more sympathetic than the articles. For instance, the book explains how the men felt “badly shaken” after watching the anti-abortion film The Silent Scream and how it made them believe that God had called them to act (Risen and Thomas 198). On the other hand, one Times article almost seems to mock the men while making them appear cocky, apathetic and emotionless, and even a bit unintelligent. This could be attributed to the fact that the book is not written to report a news story, as the Times is, but rather can take the time to weave a more personal account of the event and those responsible for it. Also in Risen and Thomas’s interpretation, the event itself seems rather un-shocking and even inferior to similar actions made by others, whereas in the Times articles, the events are made to seem much more important and on a larger scale than the authors of the book make it appear. The reasons for this could be due to the fact that the book accounts the progression and history of the anti-abortion cause, including what could be considered more serious and important and better-executed and effective in the overall history of the movement, descriptions that the Goldsby-Simmons case do not warrant when compared to the other events Risen and Thomas describe. Furthermore, a newspaper such as the Times would write about something small as if it was great and important in order to catch the attention of the reader and get him or her to adopt a certain attitude or opinion towards the event, and that seems as if this may have happened in the case of the coverage of the Goldsby-Simmons bombings. Plus, the anti-abortion movement has yet to reach its most violent and extreme form, so when reading the Risen and Thomas book there is already prior knowledge of events which are far greater and more significant than the one mentioned here, a foresight that those reporting as the event occurs have not. The Risen and Thomas text make the bombings out to be a dramatic event, but not one that warrants too much attention and not overly important when considering the history of the movement and the greater violence to come, while the Times articles make it out to be a greater deal than perhaps it really was in hindsight, making the men involved out to be just short of domestic terrorists.
Though I looked extensively on multiple databases, I could find no photograph from or relating to the Goldsby and Simmons bombings of the Ladies Center or of the other abortion providers. However, based on many of the images of other protests outside of the Ladies Center, particularly and overwhelmingly of Paul Hill, it can be argued that the images do hold more power over the viewer than the texts of both Risen and Thomas and the Times. The messages of these photographs do not seem to be any different from the text, especially since they are carefully selected to match the feeling of the texts which they usually accompany, but they can contribute a visual element that is easier for one to respond to and in a quicker time, be that response positive or negative. In the case of many of the Paul Hill photographs, Hill is viewed in an almost sympathetic light, sometimes with his family, sometimes protesting and promoting what he knows to be right, and other times defending his beliefs from jail, often with quotes that explain how he looks at his execution positively because it will bring him back to his God. In general comparison, the written descriptions in the Risen and Thomas book mirror some of these sentiments of occasional sympathy and justification for the actions made while those in the Times (or probably any other newspaper) will stick with facts but spin them to support whichever view the reporter personally (or editorial staff) has toward the event, presenting a bias when compared to the book, which tends not to support one side over the other but rather leaves the decision up to the reader.
