Shea Post 10

1. 
   

The Supreme Court’s decision in 1973 was met with both outrage and celebration from different sphere’s within the American public. Until that point, the federal government was equipped to prohibit the practice of abortion medicine within certain states, Texas in particular. On both sides of the controversy, violation of constitutional rights was named as the source of injustice. The matter of whose rights were being violated, however, separated the pro-lifers from the pro-choicers. Women’s rights activists were prevalent among many who saw the verdict as a triumph for their cause. In their eyes it reclaimed the female’s right to control her body along with her right to privacy.

The outrage was not limited to religious groups, although McVeigh and Sikkink found that members of an established religious faith were more likely to disapprove of laws favoring abortion. It came from the belief that life begins at the time of conception which was advocated in 1869 by Pius IX (abortion power point). Abortion was seen as murder, a violation of the unborn child’s right to life.

The progression of the anti-abortion movement towards Pensacola over the next two decades is well exemplified by the actions of Joan Andrews, excluding her years spent in jail. Her mother’s heavy emphasis on Catholicism throughout her upbringing certainly influenced Andrews’s position on abortion. After the Roe v. Wade case, she was strongly moved to fight the new policy and began doing so by participating in sit-ins throughout the country. Sit-ins were the first popular step taken by the anti-abortion movement and so organizers were encouraged to take caution when conducting them. Small groups, rarely exceeding 100 people would block the entrance to abortion clinics holding signs and chanting either slogans or hymns, depending on religious affiliation. These signs were probably text-based to begin with so as not to overly agitate the police who would eventually be called to break up the protest.

These first organized efforts were not always enough to satisfy activists like Joan Andrews who longed to leave more lasting impressions on abortion providers. She represents one of the many individuals who took matters into their own hands by secretly performing illegal acts of protest. “I knew right away I had to go bust up the equipment.” (190) Her acts of personal vandalism include graffiti, equipment destruction, circulation of noxious and often airborne chemicals, and interestingly enough, gluing doors shut (193). Others, like Michael Bray, Thomas Spinks and Rachelle Shannon behaved more radically and recklessly by choosing arson as their weapon against abortion (86, 351).

Such extreme behavior was not initially advocated by organized groups like PLAN or Project Rescue although they did eventually begin to take more drastic measures over time. Andrews participated in sit-ins while simultaneously performing acts of vandalism on her own time (191). What had been pleading with ingoing patients for a change of heart became shouting accusations of murder. The pickets took on images of aborted fetuses in addition to their textual messages in an effort to alarm patients into turning back. This behavior often brought about physical violence from harassed patients and restraining orders against leaders like Randall Terry who practiced “sidewalk preaching”.

Legal action was taken in 1985 when the Northeast Women’s Center in Philadelphia charged a group of protesters led by Michael McMonagle with conspiring to run the center out of business. This charge fell under violation of the federal racketeering laws and marked the transition from disturbing the peace to breaking the law (193). Protests only gained speed after the judge ruled against them. “A sense of betrayal by Regan’s Washington was sending mainstream abortion foes into the arms of the militants.” (241) With abortion rates doubling each year and their sit-in efforts getting them nowhere crowds enlarged to reach numbers of 600 and the goal became getting arrested rather than closing clinics. Joan Andrews became very accomplished at offending the law not only by violating trespassing laws and the like, but by violating her parole with complete abandon. Like the desperate movement Andrews turned to figures whose tactics held a higher level of shock value. John Burt was a “former Marine, former Klansman, former alcoholic, former speed abuser and divorced father as well as a born again Christian…who ran “a home for wayward girls, called Our Father’s House.” (195) His methods were extremely visual, utilizing anti-abortion propaganda films like The Hard Truth and Who Will Cry for Me – David as well as an aborted fetus which he carried around in a jar and called “Baby Charlie” (341, 199).

It was with John Burt that Joan Andrews broke into The Ladies Center clinic in Pensacola in 1986 and destroyed medical equipment (186). This act landed her in prison for three years where, ironically, her activism was much more effective than it had been outside bars due to her newfound position as a “martyr” or a “prisoner of consciousness”. By taking on the system through total non-cooperation “she was forcing others to reevaluate their limits.” (210)

As it turns out, many of their limits extended much beyond the realm of property damage as even more vehement figures took hold of the movement, encouraging violence against abortion doctors. “With pacifists like John Okeefe and Sam Lee long gone from the leadership ranks there were no counterbalancing forces within the movement pushing for peace.” (344) Of course, and thankfully, the entire anti-abortion movement did not take this course. Only extremists of the highest caliber took the words of Paul Hill’s Should We defend Born and Unborn Children with Force? and Michael Bray’s A Time to Kill to heart. As Proverbs 24:11 were lost in the wake of Genesis 9:6 and more doctors began wearing bullet proof vests to work the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1993 popped up as well as the Justice Department’s conspiracy investigation on the anti-abortion movement. No conspiracy was uncovered and the department stated that “there is a difference between having a common purpose and having an actual criminal conspiracy.” (369) This suggests, although they were advocated, no murders were actually planned in advance by any pro-life organizations.

2. 
   

“Biblical literalism and religious participation had a strong impact on the likelihood of participating in protest movements” (McVeigh, 1426). Michael Bray’s life was at all times steeped in religion. Throughout the course of his life he practiced as a Baptist, a Protestant, a sort of Calvinist Puritan and a Premellenial Dispensationalist. Ultimately his beliefs centered on predestination and the writings of Calvin and John Knox. These advocated the “rebellion against idolatrous and tyrannical sovereigns” with the justification that “if God is for us who can be against us?” (Risen, Thomas, 82). His powerful belief in the superiority of the ‘elect’ and their responsibility to God was certainly the driving force behind the bombings which he performed with Thomas Spinks but McVeigh and Sikkink offer a more multidimensional view of the contributing forces that lead Bray down this path.

The concepts of moral absolutism as well as that of personal threat, though not wholly consistent, provide more insight to the question of why certain members of religious groups take such drastic measures in opposition to practices like abortion. “Participants in a moral reform movement are acting defensively in an effort to preserve a moral order that provides meaning for their lives.” (McVeigh, 1431) Abortion is perceived not only as murder, but as attack on the religious doctrines which deem it to be immoral. These rulebooks are not meant only to apply to their followers, but to the entire human race. Everyone is accountable to a single, inflexible moral code which “promotes definitions of issues as conflictual that from another perspective might be defined otherwise.” (McVeigh, 1432) In this way, the violation of a universal moral code by anyone, weakens the code and threatens both the faith and well being of those who live by it. Michael Bray saw himself as the defender of such a moral code. “It was appropriate for the Godly man to take the law into his own hands because his hands were the tools of God.” (Risen, Thomas, 82)

The belief that humans are sinful by their very nature also contributes to the enactment of contentious tactics, particularly those used against abortion. The inherent instinct towards wrongdoing deprives what Michael Bray would have considered to be the ‘damned’ of the capacity to choose the moral path. For this reason, people must either be denied access to abortion medicine by means of the law, or they must be destroyed. This mentality was obviously in action when Bray wrote A Time to Kill.

3. 
   

On September 18^th, 1988, the New York Times printed an article entitled 250 Arrested at Jersey Anti-Abortion Protest. The facts were these: Operation Rescue, under the leadership of Randal Terry, organized a protest outside the Planned Parenthood Clinic in Shrewsbury, NJ, blocking the entrance with linked arms. When arrests began, the protesters went limp and broke into song making the police to carry them away from the site. The Wrath of Angels presents a relatively less biased portrayal of these anti-abortionists than does the NYT. This is not due to the language employed by the author, but to the organization of the article. First the facts are relayed and the members of Operation Rescue are represented by a quotation defending their position. Then the patient reaction is described, a matter that was hardly ever touched by Risen and Thomas. The patients’ responses along with the sturdy words of the clinic employee leave the reader with a sense of triumph by the Planned Parenthood. “None of them are shaken up.” The book of course had more room to develop the actions of Operation Rescue with an extensive background on Randal Terry and his methods. The detail, however, is mostly one-sided and works to construct an image of the man as obsessive and power-hungry.

These images of Randal Terry, the leader of Operation Rescue, as he protests and preaches make him out to be both a powerful figure and a lunatic. The first depicts a righteous man preaching down from on high with the nation’s capital behind and below him. The text discusses this event with a much different tone. That is because terry takes this moment to praise Christmas morning clinic bombings as “a birthday gift for Jesus.”

The second image shows a freak with a dead baby in a box. This characterization is immediately much harsher than the one given by the book. Terry is accused of wielding graphic pamphlets against abortion patients but never of utilizing an actual fetus. Such tactics seemed to be reserved for John Burt. (this image was unable to load but can be located on page 218 of the Risen book)

The New York Times article Judge Won’t Let Accused in Clinic Attack Argue that Killing was Justified remains impartial and factual, adhering strictly to court proceedings until its final paragraphs which shed a more sinister light on Paul Hill’s behavior throughout his murder trial. Once the witnesses’ testimony is approached, the man’s reserved composure becomes disturbing due to graphic descriptions of “brains” and Mrs. Barrett’s reaction to her husband’s death. The Wrath of Angels takes this portrayal to an even higher degree by describing the entire shooting scene in detail after a thorough development of Hill’s religious and activist progression up to that point. The scene in which he screams “Mommy mommy please don’t kill me!” outside the same abortion clinic along with the one in which he practices shooting the murder weapon in his own home bring the reader to see him as mentally unstable and downright scary.

These men’s support of Paul Hill’s unthinkable deed is just as scary. The image’s disturbing quality, however, comes from the name’s connotation and so it is mostly attributed to textual rather than visual power. The book too depends almost entirely on textual power aside from a few photos at the center. Both the image and the book’s discussion on Paul Hill supporters are about equally effective at delivering their message.

Here, Paul Hill stands behind bars, awaiting his death sentence. Again, if it were not for his name’s societal weight, this image would be likely to invoke sympathy from viewers. But since Paul Hill is the infamous abortion murderer, we are able to take solace, even celebration in his defeated and hopeless position. The Wrath of Angels allowed the reader to feel nothing but awe and disgust at the character of Paul Hill. After his arrest, his role in the piece was finished.