In my previous blog, I promised to address areas where abortion advocates have attempted to tarnish pro-lifers as hypocritical. In particular, since many proponents of abortion like to promote themselves as “pro-choice” and we, their pro-life opponents as “anti-choice,” I wish to take up the gauntlet of establishing why “pro-life” is an apt label. In a pair of articles previously included in our regular newsletter, I already addressed several areas where many “pro-choicers” virulently oppose choice in order to further abortion, and I will continue here to demonstrate why pro-lifers rightfully deserve their chosen label.

The previous blog tackled how it is possible for pro-lifers to also defend captial punishment. This time, I plan to answer the favoured perception that pro-aborts have fought to sully pro-lifers with - the claim that pro-lifers contradict themselves by engaging in or supporting violent or murderous acts against abortionists. The question then is, how can one claim to be pro-life through the use of murder?

The short answer is, you can’t. The contradicion cannot be reconciled. Let me demonstrate through an example from the area of environmental activism. Many of you may be familiar with “eco-terrorists.” These are fringe organizations that claim to be working on behalf of protecting wildlife and the environment. These groups seek to further their message often by creating the types of disasters that greatly exacerbate the destruction and devastation they claim to be committed to ending. They have started forest fires, set fire to car dealerships and engaged in various forms of mayhem while proclaiming to be champions of nature and the environment.

They are rightly marginalized as fringe elements with no link to other prminent environmental and animal rights groups such as the Sierra Club and P.E.T.A. While these agroups are provocative and extreme in their own way, no one is giving extensive media coverage to acts of eco-terrorism with headlines like, “Environmentalists wreak more havoc across midwest.”

The same cannot be said for pro-life groups. Those who have used violence against abortionists, including the most recent murder of Dr. Tiller, and clinics have been a few fringe groups or individuals with absolutely no affiliation with truly pro-life organizations. Pro-life groups furthermore give no tacit or covert endorsement of any such action, as overwhelmingly demonstrated by local, national and international pro-life groups’ public condemnation of the killing of Dr. Tiller’s murder. To emphasize my point, I’d like to relate a couple of details of my own journey into pro-life work.

In 2000, I was attempting to pursue a private family counselling career. I came across Halton Pro-Life and thought it might be a resource for information on STDs, since I knew STDs had been rapidly spreading, but the risks seemed to be progressively minimized since I had been in school (25 years ago!). I wanted all possible information for potential clients to become fully informed.

Abortion was an issue for which I had a strong visceral dislike, but accepted that it couldn’t be killing or there wouldn’t be such mainstream acceptance, and the prolife fight certainly would have penetrated the media and obviously my church. I had no personal investment, but from the wisdom I found from the pro-lifers I spoke with, I knew I needed to learn the facts for myself and for others. The science was irrefutable, so the tough part was in my preconceptions that pro-life was largely a Catholic issue and I had been exposed to the high profile stories of abortion clinic bombings and assassinations (or attempts) against abortionists.

The more I immersed myself, the more I learned how far my perception was from reality. While the Halton Pro-Life literature included the phrase “we support only peaceful means to prmote our message,” and I was convinced of the sincerity of those with whom I had spoken, I needed to be assured (and so did my wife) that this was not a fringe organization. When I was invited to join the Board of Directors, I attended meetings for a full year before I could fully test my impressions of the organization and assure my wife this was a safe eneavour in which to involve myself.

That was seven years ago and I look back at that episode and shake my head. The most disturbing aspect is that I could adopt sucha mythological perception of abortion, pro-life and pro-lifers because this falacy has been able to take hold in mainstream culture. The absurdity of the specious, circular, self-serving and meaningless arguments of those leading the abortion cause have succeeded in peddling an indictment of society as individuals, demonstrating how those controlling the message can shape perception.

No, it is not possible to be pro-life and support violence in order to achieve one’s objectives. The entire pro-life message is that shortcuts don’t work and facts do matter. I ask that everyone become informed about prenatal development, abortion and all the life issues from all the sources you can.

I welcome your thoughts. Please leave a comment or feel free to ask a question, and I would be pleased to respond. I believe a thinking pro-choicer is a pro-lifer at the embryonic stage.

Tom Bartlett, President of the Board