NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/bit/listserv/catholic/3725

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-24 | 3.5 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!tulane!mintir!seashell!elendil
From: [e-mail] (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Operation Rescue
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 92 08:23:26 CST
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Seashell Software
Lines: 63

Marty Helgesen <[e-mail]> writes:

> I have read some of your posts but not all of them.  I am
> sorry if I misunderstood your position.
>
> I have not studied Operation Rescue in detail.  What I have read
> about it discussed non-violent blocking of access to abortion
> chambers--"putting their bodies between the killers and the
> intended victims" as OR spokesmen put it.

Which is classic civil disobedience.  If that was all that OR was doing, then I
would not have such a problem with their actions.  However, since the clinics
have switched from passive (letting the police just clear the
sidewalks/entrances) defense to a more active form of defense ('clinic
defenders'), OR's tactics have become increasingly more violent.  There have
been documented cases of attacks by OR protestors on clinic defenders.  Six
people arrested two weeks ago in Baton Rouge for aggravated battery in
connection with an attack on a clinic guard.  That's not the stuff of
non-violent civil disobedience.

The pro-life movement has regularly invoked the imagery of the '60s civil
rights and anti-war protests.  The similarities have been quite profound.  As
soon as OR starts down the path of violence, the imagery shifts from sit-ins
and putting flowers in the barrels of guns to that of the SDS and Black
Panthers.

>
> John Brown was wrong to kill people who were pro-choice on slavery.
> (Slavery was a matter of free choice.  No white man who was personally
> opposed to slavery was required to own slaves.)  In fact, I have used
> the Pottawatomie, Kansas Massacre and the Harper's Ferry Raid in
> discussions with pro-abortionists, pointing out that just as his
> wrongful activities did not justify slavery or discredit the entire
> abolitionist movement, less drastic wrongdoing on the part of
> some pro-lifers cannot justify abortion or discredit the right to
> life movement.  The important question is not whether pro-lifers
> are good people but whether unborn children are people at all.
> -------
> Marty Helgesen
> Bitnet: mnhcc@cunyvm   Internet: [e-mail]
>
> "Experience beats in vain upon a congenital progressive."
>         --  C. S. Lewis

Your point is well taken, but I believe that your analogy is flawed.
John Brown led a small group of fanatics,
and it was indeed unfair to characterize the entire abolitionist movement in
that fashion.  OR, on the other hand is going across the country, organizing
protests and training others for more protests.  It's as if John Brown had
chapters of his abolitionist movement in cities across the country.  Further,
OR has become the primary outward symbol of civil disobedience with regard to
abortion.  If OR continues their violent tactics, then the entire pro-life
movement will be tainted.  What is necessary is for groups not affiliated with
OR to organize true non-violent protests, sidewalk blockings, etc.  If that
means that it's more difficult to perform 'rescues,' then so be it.  The loss
of the moral high ground on this issue is devastating to the entire cause.

Merry Christmas, Marty.  I hope I've explained my position better.



|Edward J. Branley         [e-mail]|
|Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            [phone]|