My 2004 article on Roe v. Wade, which never found a home with the usual publications

exclusive to Free Republic | 1/22/04 | Barbara Curtis

[barbaracurtis]

Thirty One Years Later – Slippery Slopes Take a New Turn

If liberalism is like a religion – clinging to messianic government just as believers trust in God – then abortion is its holiest sacrament. Consider the sacred grounds of today’s abortion temples, the elevation of “abortion providers” to noble redeemers – a parallel priesthood of death. Consider how the left’s devotion to multiculturalism is trumped by the evangelical fervor with which they invade other countries to spread the “good news” that the natives can achieve salvation by eliminating masses of their children. And for behind-the-scenes Machiavellianism, no religion can beat the left: A recently leaked Center for Reproductive Rights internal memo details their strategy to achieve the globalization of abortion on demand – under the euphemistic umbrella of “reproductive freedom.” Like communion smuggled into hostile territory, the left’s sacrament must also be concealed. CRR notes, "There is a stealth quality to the work: we are achieving incremental recognition of values without a huge amount of scrutiny from the opposition." For true believers, sacraments have an inevitable component of mystery. Is anyone beginning to notice that the ideology of abortion now flies in the face of science and reason? Why the suppression of studies linking breast cancer to abortion? And what of the advances in technology which show more and more poignantly the humanity of the being feminists insist must be called the fetus? Newsweek’s June 9, 2003 cover story asked “Should a Fetus Have Rights? How Science is Changing the Debate.” The courts are in a quandary what with the Peterson case and women surfacing all over the country to press charges against assailants who beat or kicked the life out of their unborn babies. There’s the reality that the gestational age of surviving preemies is steadily falling. And surgeons opening mothers’ wombs to correct defects like spina bifida. Remember the teeny hand reaching out to grasp his doctor’s finger? Finally, the newest ultrasound machines, showing the truth about what was always more than the left wanted to anyone to see. Pro-life clinics as well as Fetal Fotos franchisees (really!) are snapping up this new technology to change a mind or turn a profit. Which leads one to wonder nowadays how much denial it must take to believe that what’s inside the mother is not a human life unless the mother says so? Let’s go back to the day it began – mothers replacing God as the authors of life – January 22, 1973. When the Supreme Court somehow pulled a “right to privacy” out of its magic hat, I wasn’t looking too closely for flaws in the way it was done. As a highly-enlightened radical feminist, I scoffed at dour warnings of slippery slopes, simply rejoicing with my Second Wave Sisters at our victory. Five years later, I celebrated the victory and partook of the sacrament myself, with no more inconvenience than a trip to the dentist. Thirty one years later I wonder what in the world we were thinking. Surely not one of us imagined that abortions would become more a convenience item than a last resort, that at the rate of 1.5 million a year, they would eradicate a third of all babies conceived. Focusing only on economics, the outcome will come back to haunt us: a third less work force to carry the Social Security burden of the choice-happy Boomers who live on and on. Why were we so close-minded to the philosophical arguments against abortion? Those slippery slopes quickly became a freefall, leading to abortions of preborn babies for being the wrong gender or having a cleft palate. And the horror of a presidential candidate endorsing partial-birth abortion. And the conclusion of Princeton professor/ bioethicist Peter Singer that parents of disabled infants should be allowed 30 days to decide whether to allow their child to live or die. By characterizing children as burdens rather than blessings, abortion led to the devaluation of every one of them and – I believe – the murderous mom syndrome, with babies dumped in dumpsters, stuffed in airplane trashcans, toddlers drowned in lakes or bathtubs, kids strangled, smothered, stabbed, shot, beaten, burned to death by their own mothers. How could it happen that we women, the bearers and nurturers of life, could have even for a moment wanted to appropriate for ourselves the right to kill? First Wave Feminists hated abortion, likening it to slavery in its premise that one human being could be disposed of as the property of another. And yet abortion has now become the cornerstone, the litmus test, the defining issue of liberalism today – with some dramatic exceptions like Nat Hentoff and a noble few consistent to the liberal tradition of protecting the weak and helpless. (Visit http://no-violence.net for a fascinating assortment of leftist pro-life writing – including the pre-presidential candidate incarnation of Jesse Jackson.) Before the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln said, “Slavery is founded on the selfishness of man's nature – opposition to it on his love of justice. These principles are in eternal antagonism; and when brought into collision so fiercely as slavery extension brings them, shocks and throes and convulsions must ceaselessly follow.” The word quagmire comes to mind. On this anniversary of Roe v. Wade, after thirty one years of shocks and throes, let’s reflect on how it came to pass that what seemed desirable in 1973 has finally proven indefensible. Roe v. Wade is now the law of the land, but not necessarily forever, as Dred Scott was not forever. Once again, the times they are a-changin’. A November Gallup poll revealed that 72 percent of American teenagers find abortion morally wrong. Perhaps they’re looking askance at the selfishness that caused one third of their brothers, sisters, and peers to go missing. Perhaps they’re haunted by the knowledge that there but for the grace of God and the whim of their mothers they might have gone as well. In any case, like the boy who accurately perceived the Emperor had no clothes, post-Boomers bathed in a different cultural and scientific awareness – despite current over-the-top efforts of Planned Parenthood and other denominations to bring them into the fold – appear to be rapidly abandoning the religion of their mothers.

Barbara Curtis is a much-published author and mother of many, including several adopted children with special needs. Visit her at www.barbaracurtis.com

[barbaracurtis]

oops -- i don't know why my paragraph breaks are missing. if there's a way to fix this, please let me know.
barbara curtis

[anniegetyourgun]

May truth go marching on - even in the face of the lies.

[camle]

in 1974 I was pretty much run out of town on a rail for writing a fetus-eye-view of abortion for the local community college newspaper. nothing i wrote afterwards was ever published, nor was I welcome anywhere on campus.

sometimes the truth hurts.

problem is that few (including the church) were troubled by abortion 100 years ago when the us nearly reached ZPG. it was outlawed because people knew there was going to be a huge european war, and we didn't have enou8gh cannon fodder.

[NYer]

Excellent article, Barbara! Thank you for posting it. Not ONE mention on the morning news or talk shows about today's >b>March For Life.

LIVE coverage of the March For Life, today, beginning at 11am EST on EWTN.

And surgeons opening mothers’ wombs to correct defects like spina bifida. Remember the teeny hand reaching out to grasp his doctor’s finger?

The Story Behind the Photograph

As a veteran photojournalist in Nashville, Tennessee, I was hired by USA Today newspaper to photograph a spina bifida corrective surgical procedure. It was to be performed on a twenty-one week old fetus in utero at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. At that time, in 1999, twenty-one weeks in utero was the earliest that the surgical team would consider for surgery. The worst possible outcome would be that the surgery would cause premature delivery, and no child born earlier than twenty-three weeks had survived.

The tension could be felt in the operating room as the surgery began. A typical C-section incision was made to access the uterus, which was then lifted out and laid at the junction of the mother's thighs. The entire procedure would take place within the uterus, and no part of the child was to breach the surgical opening. During the procedure, the position of the fetus was adjusted by gently manipulating the outside of the uterus. The entire surgical procedure on the child was completed in 1 hour and thirteen minutes. When it was over, the surgical team breathed a sigh of relief, as did I.

As a doctor asked me what speed of film I was using, out of the corner of my eye I saw the uterus shake, but no one's hands were near it. It was shaking from within. Suddenly, an entire arm thrust out of the opening, then pulled back until just a little hand was showing. The doctor reached over and lifted the hand, which reacted and squeezed the doctor's finger. As if testing for strength, the doctor shook the tiny fist. Samuel held firm. I took the picture! Wow! It happened so fast that the nurse standing next to me asked, "What happened?" "The child reached out," I said. "Oh. They do that all the time," she responded.

The surgical opening to the uterus was closed and the uterus was then put back into the mother and the C-section opening was closed.

It was ten days before I knew if the picture was even in focus. To ensure no digital manipulation of images before they see them, USA Today requires that film be submitted unprocessed. When the photo editor finally phoned me he said, "It's the most incredible picture I've ever seen."

Michael Clancy

Catholic Ping - let me know if you want on/off this list

[NYer]

Pro Life Ping!

[GrandEagle]

Great article. No telling how many lives have been saved by that photo. I would think it's a bit of a hard sell for the pro death group to pass this child off as a "lump of tissue".

[Republic If You Can Keep It]

The greatest civil rights issue of them all is yet to be settled.

Great article.

[NYer]

No telling how many lives have been saved by that photo. I would think it's a bit of a hard sell for the pro death group to pass this child off as a "lump of tissue".

Yes! That is indeed what has happened!

Michael Clancy, the photographer, appeared in an interview on EWTN last week. He did not see the photo he shot until 10 days later, when he was called by his editor. That picture showed up on the Drudge Report and was picked up by many in the media.

His presence at the surgery was intended to simply document the procedure. Up until then, he had never taken a stance on abortion. When he saw the uterus 'shake', he aimed his camera and shot 10 photos. He said that one picture and the actual experience of watching that tiny hand from the womb, has totally transformed him.

[GrandEagle]

My wife works in the intensive care nursery at a local hospital. They have even had 22 week old children born and live; not often, but sometimes God grants the continuation of life even this early.
When Clinton was in office and threatening to veto the partial birth abortion ban bill, I wrote him. I explained that if he had any doubts about these small children being a life he could visit a local hospital and I was sure that they would be happy to give him a tour.
At that point I was sure the truth would be self-evident. In his response he wrote that he had prayed about the matter and that the answer he received was that the veto was the right thing to do.
Since Jehovah God, the creator of all that exists, is the granter of all life. And since his word makes it clear that he knew me while I was in my mothers womb and my members were not yet formed. And since Jesus himself spoke about the fierceness of Gods wrath upon those who harm little children. Clinton’s response let me know beyond a shadow of a doubt who his god is.

I frequently offer this "put up or shut up" offer of a tour to pro death people that run into.
I have only had two take me up on the offer. One was an adult who, after seeing these children was in tears. She is now very solid pro-life, even though she professes to be atheist. (Another issue - I think she is lying)
The second was a friend of one of my students at church who was contemplating abortion. We saved that life. She gave birth and put the child up for adoption.
Most refuse to look, leading me to believe that they really know that abortion is killing a child and just don't want to admit it.

Probably the most unexpected response was from a woman who told me in no uncertain terms, that a dog that someone wanted had more value than a baby that no one cared about.
I'll admit that one had me speachless.
She wouldn't go on the tour either.

[Salvation]

Bump, be back later to read this.

[clockwise]

Every time I see that photo my eyes tear up.

Sniff.

[workerbee]

By characterizing children as burdens rather than blessings, abortion led to the devaluation of every one of them and – I believe – the murderous mom syndrome, with babies dumped in dumpsters, stuffed in airplane trashcans, toddlers drowned in lakes or bathtubs, kids strangled, smothered, stabbed, shot, beaten, burned to death by their own mothers.

You are so right. It's almost a certainty that among those who have committed these horrible acts of abuse against their children, you will find a very favorable attitude towards abortion.