On Friday 22 May 2020, US TV FX airs a controversial
documentary, “AKA JANE ROE”, which tells the story of Norma McCorvey famous for
the woman in the Roe v. Wade case brought before the US Supreme Court. The
court’s 1973 ruling legalized abortion in the US.
At the time of her pregnancy, women could only get an
abortion in Texas if the mother’s life was in danger. Henry Wade defended the
law. McCorvey filed her case when pregnant in 1969. She was pregnant with her
third child due to an alleged rape, but she was forced to give birth when her case was
rejected.
Pentecostal pastor, Rev. Robert Schenck, was
a prolife advocate and one of the evangelicals who worked with McCorvey. She
became a voice for the prolife movement. One of the controversial pieces of
information in the story is the amount she was paid for her appearances- said
to be near $500,000 in today’s money. Rev. Schenk confirms that McCorvey was paid.
So what if she was paid for her appearances?
Obviously famous people get paid for their speeches. The controversy comes from
McCorvey’s statements that “It was
all an act. I did it well too. I am a good actress.” And, "If a young
woman wants to have an abortion, that's no skin off my ass. That's why they
call it choice."
.png?format=750w) |
| Rev. Rob Schenck revrobschenck.com |
What did Rev. Schenk
say? "I knew what we were doing," Mr
Schenck says. "And there were times when I was sure she knew. "And I
wondered: 'Is she playing us?' What I didn't have the guts to say was: "Because
I know damn well we're playing her." Rev. Schenck provides an emotional response
to AKA JANE ROE as he recalls his memories.
See the BBC report
for the McCorvey and Schenck quotes above.
Prolife as Total
War
World War II was a total war. During total
war, the combatants pay any price to achieve victory. Treaties and agreements
are thrown out the window. People are resources to be exploited for the sake of
a cause. In contrast, a limited and justified war is a last resort when all
peaceful attempts have been made to stop a moral evil. A limited and justified
war focuses on the enemy, its combatants, and its war-related resources while
attempting to avoid killing civilians and destroying their heritage.
It’s easy to lose
focus in the prolife- abortion war. As with modern warfare, even the most
precise attacks harm the very people the war is supposed to protect. In fact,
it is hard to identify the enemies in the US prolife war. In some ways, lawyers
are the combatants as they argue before judges who decide what becomes law.
Meanwhile, politicians and their constituents engage in combat as they fight to
change laws governing when and under what conditions a woman may legally end
her pregnancy.
Although the
Republican Party has become the prolife party with strong evangelical support, they have not passed antiabortion legislation when in control of the national government. However, they have
managed to place prolife justices on the Supreme Court, which may lead to
greater restrictions in the future. This goal of changing the composition of the Supreme Court to win the prolife battle is a reason many Christians support Republican candidates.
Unfortunately, too many people think they must insult their fellow citizens despite wining the battle to place prolife justices on the Supreme Court. Incivility abounds as antiabortion supporters
continually attack others as “baby killers” and “murderers.” The doctors who
perform abortions are obvious targets of vitriol, if they were to enter the fray.
Somehow, lost in all
this anger and hatred are women like Jane Roe, Norma McCorvey. Strangely, 36%
of women who have an abortion were attending church at the time of their first
abortion (LifeWay). For whatever reasons, these church-going women have not been reached with the prolife message.
Fighting wars in courts or attacking voters and physicians somehow takes the
focus away from the real people involved—those 3-4 out of 10 pregnant women thinking about an abortion, while sitting beside others as they worship in church. Don't forget the girls in Sunday School learning about a loving Jesus while pregnant from a rapist.
Prolife ought to be
about promoting life for girls or women and their babies.
Instead prolife v
prochoice has escalated into a near total war aimed at recruiting or demonizing
voters, judges, and physicians—none of whom ultimately makes the intensely personal
decision to end a pregnancy.
Sometimes I think prolife
battles too often show the weakness of Christian love—a love that is too weak
to persuade women or girls to give birth for the right reasons. For some, love has
turned to anger and hate. Some will use any available means to win the war—people
who care more about winning a victory than loving the people at the center of
the struggle.
Fortunately, there are
loving prolife advocates who do support pregnant women, use technology to show
evidence of the small life within, and offer adoption options for those unable
to raise a child.
Prolife is not a Christian cause. Prolife is about the rights of people--mothers and the new lives within them. It is true that Catholics and Evangelicals gain most of the national attention, but the public should know that some atheists support prolife as well. "Dismemberment is Wrong" says a sign. See the ChristianPost.
Read more
Rev. Schenck’s emotional blogpost
about his reaction to Norma’s story.
Dr. Brandon Schmidly’s chapter on abortion
in Christian
Morality.
Washington
Post provides a biographic history of Norma McCorvey in reporting the story.
FX network show details AKA JANE ROW
Rev. Robert Schenk Wikipedia
Connections
My
Page www.suttong.com
TWITTER @Geoff.W.Sutton
Publications (many free downloads)
Academia Geoff W Sutton (PhD)
ResearchGate Geoffrey W Sutton (PhD)
Having been demonized by the supposed pro-life crowd, and even lost a position because I wished to hold a conversation around this tempestuous topic, I know first hand how little these pro-lifers really care about life. They are willing to go to extremes to protect an unborn baby, they are yet voting for legislators who continually seek to reduce and/or end support for young women who often seek abortion because of their grinding poverty and lack of services. They often have to choose between their (abusive) partner or the baby, their job or the baby, eating, medication, apartment, etc. or the baby.
ReplyDeleteBecause the vast majority (80%-90% on last reading) of people in the USA are opposed to abortion on demand, that would include Republicans, Democrats, and Independents, it is more reasonable to believe that the differences between policy choices is really the way of dealing with abortion not the justification of either a free-for-all abortion on demand, or an absolute restriction on abortion. The only difference I see between Republicans and Democrats is that Republicans want to make abortion unavailable by law with the threat of punishment, while the Democrats want to make abortion unnecessary by caring for the real needs of women who would otherwise abort.
The callousness of the pro-life movement seeking to elevate punishment is simply using the only instrument it is familiar with, violence. And though the messaging of the pro-choice movement has slowly turned to the needs of women as primary, it has often proclaimed the rights of women to their own bodies as a legal protection. Admittedly the language of rights is more neutral and universal in the Constitution, but the languages of rights and punishment are insufficient to address the real needs of unhappily pregnant women. When do we get to listen to them more closely and frame a response in kind. And yes, let us consider how to be kind and not threatening, or using the power of the state to force our dodgy morality on each other.