“Pro-Life” Extremists Disrupt Interfaith Service at DNC


Proving yet again just how extreme the far-right "pro-life" movement really is, protesters disrupted an interfaith prayer service at the opening of the Democratic National Convention. Protesters were also escorted from the first meeting of the DNC’s African-American Caucus where they shouted "Obama supports black genocide" and, in a third location, gathered around the headquarters of Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains. There they were met by supporters of women’s legal rights to choose who "just showed up once they realized what was happening" and were not part of an organized protest according to sources in Denver.

One older "pro-life" protester at the Planned Parenthood protest claims that abortion is responsible for our problems with Social Security, which gives you some indication that his concerns are perhaps more self-involved than the line they put forth about being concerned about babies. Forced birth is the answer to Social Security, I’m sure McCain will be campaigning on that very soon.

This from the Rocky Mountain News:

"There are people in that room that still have a conscience," said
Randall Terry, founder and president of the Washington-based
anti-abortion group Operation: Rescue, explaining why after the first
song of the gathering he stood and shouted, "Obama supports the killing
of children by abortion."

Another man shouted, "Obama is a baby killer," and a third man —
Joseph Landry, who said he is affiliated with Operation Rescue, yelled
to the crowd, "You are not Christians."

"No Christian in good conscience can support a baby killer like
Obama," Landry said, adding that of all the Democrats and their stances
on abortion, "He’s the worst we ever had."

 

As reported by Naomi Zeveloff today, splits in the "pro-life" movement are causing rifts within social conservative circles, and the evidence from the protests today seem to indicate the way they will fight it out is by trying to see who can out extreme the other by disrupting prayer, and other meetings. We’ve seen the "pro-life" blogs explode with outrageous claims in the past couple of weeks that include what Sen. Obama blatantly called "lies" including that he supports "infanticide." Then again, Jill Stanek said the similar things about former First Lady Barbara Bush:

In
her November 7, 2007, WorldNetDaily column, Stanek
wrote that Barbara Bush, wife of former President George H.W. Bush, was
"a pro-abort," adding that her "platform as first lady
was illiteracy, so she obviously thought abortion was a solution to
illiteracy. In actuality, then, she was a eugenicist, because it is poor
people who are illiterate, not rich people."

 

If you believe what these extremists say about Barack Obama, you have to believe it about Barbara Bush too.

There are plenty of issues Americans can disagree about, including reproductive health care, but it should be very clear that these "pro-life" extremists are not patriots, but rather out to destroy our democracy. They are not out to save one life, but have absolutely no respect for the private lives and medical decisions of women. Prohibition does not stop abortion, it only makes it unsafe and turns women into criminals.

Meanwhile the Democratic Platform is being hailed by both pro-life and pro-choice Democrats as progress toward improved access to health services for women, improved comprehensive sex ed and access to contraception, and strengthening the abilities for women to choose to have children by increasing support systems like pre- and post-natal care.

All this while the Bush Administration tries to jeopardize access to contraception by redefining it as abortion, in the name of "conscience" as Randall Terry and others from Operation Rescue were screaming about in one of the protests today.

This is the state of the extremist right wing Culture War in 2008, first declared by Pat Buchanan at the Republican National Convention in 1992, and that has been used to divide our country ever since. I can’t wait to see the protests next week in St. Paul if McCain has the courage to select a pro-choice running mate.

So we ask again, who is outside the American mainstream? Those working on an education and prevention agenda, or those extremists who believe only prohibition is the answer?

 

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with Scott Swenson please contact Communications Director Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

  • invalid-0

    Greetings,

    I apologize for just skimming your blog. Nonetheless, this comment merited a response: “Prohibition does not stop abortion, it only makes it unsafe and turns women into criminals.” As far as the hypothetical situation were one has to imagine that abortion is illegal, abortions will still occur with same technologies as they do today, as suction-aspiration was not around when abortions were performed with coat hangers, anyway. Also, I guess RU-486 will become an illicit drug. Considering the hypothetical legal ramifications of one who breaks the law by obtaining an abortion, I imagine the eventual law will necessarily be judged based on the individual rights of the victim, as the law is for his protection in the first place. The one who breaks any law is a criminal. I agree with you.

    Timothy+

  • invalid-0

    what you were trying to say timothy, but i suspect you are anti-choice. especially when you say “i imagine the eventual law”.
    is your point that women shouldn’t be afraid of abortion being illegal, as the illegal abortions would be “safer” than coat hangers? well, your argument has zero validity. first, i imagine that in the horrific event of right-wingers taking my freedom of choice and liberty away from me, illegal abortions done by the “suction-aspiration” method, would be done by doctors who choose to break the law. and i am pretty sure those safer illegal abortions would cost more. therefore putting poor women, ONCE AGAIN, in a dangerous situation.
    secondly, i do NOT want to hear the argument that right-wingers will be so kind as to “allow” a woman who is raped, or the victim of incest, to have an abortion. she’d still have to go in front of a panel of doctors and psychiatrists, and “prove” that she should be allowed to terminate the pregnancy.
    thirdly, stop. just stop. all right-wing, conservative, anti-women, anti-freedom, anti-liberty, anti-privacy, wackos (ESPECIALLY the men, and i have zero problem saying that i believe any man who speaks out against choice is speaking of something he knows NOTHING about) just STOP TRYING TO ENFORCE YOUR BELIEFS ON HALF OF THE ADULT POPULATION OF THIS COUNTRY.

  • invalid-0

    Greetings,

    This is a Republic, which means you are free to protect what it has given you and I am free to influence the change. The higher philosophical truth will necessarily win in the end over the current political milieu that manifests merely the totalitarianism of relativism, as I believe that the United States will not end up as every other Republic that has not assented to what is truth and instead has made it’s own truth. Kind of like a belief. Anyway…

    Timothy+

  • invalid-0

    >>STOP TRYING TO ENFORCE YOUR BELIEFS ON HALF OF THE ADULT POPULATION OF THIS COUNTRY.

    Classic – that statement in itself is an imposition and enforcement of the poster’s beliefs on another poster.

    You see the “stop imposing your beliefs” argument itself is an imposition of beliefs, and one more reason why it has no place in this debate – it’s not relevant..

  • scott-swenson

    Hey Rueben, exactly what is being imposed by asking someone not to impose specific beliefs? Respect? Privacy? Democracy? Liberty? Which exactly are you opposed to.


    Be the change you seek,

    Scott Swenson, Editor

  • invalid-0

    There is no ‘higher philosophy’ at work here beyond the desire of the self-righteous to impose their personal desires on the bodies of others via state coercive power. Don’t delude yourself into thinking otherwise.

  • invalid-0

    In other news, anti-religion pro-lifers softly cheered :)

  • amanda-marcotte

    You do realize that we’re talking about imposing religious dogma about sexuality onto actual living women who don’t agree through legal coercion, right?  What part of "banning contraception and abortion and forcing women to have babies against their will" do you not understand?

     

    Better class of troll, please.

  • amanda-marcotte

    Please quit reinforcing the idea that atheists are ugly, bitter people with no morality.  Some of us, like myself, actually do have lives with joy and don’t troll around hating on others out of resentment.

  • invalid-0

    Your blogging career is built on hating on others. And there are more than two of us who got a kick out of that…I found five who did ;)