If They Called It the “March for Forced Motherhood and Female Enslavement,” Then Would You Protest?


We are fast approaching the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision which legalized abortion. Shamefully, each year, this anniversary is not marked by a massive celebration that women no longer die by the thousands in the back-alleys; not a celebration that women no longer are forced to foreclose their lives and dreams because of unwanted pregnancies; not a celebration of the doctors who risk their lives every day to provide abortions.

Instead, this anniversary is marked by an outpouring that hates all of those extremely liberating things. This outpouring calls itself the “March for Life,” but a look at their stated principles reveals an agenda of female enslavement. The following is taken from the statement on their website, “Applying the Life Principles”:

“Although a pregnant mother and/or her preborn child may die, there is no justification in the law of God or man for the intentional killing of even one innocent born or preborn human in existence at fertilization. NO EXCEPTION! NO COMPROMISE!

First, a woman who is pregnant is… a woman who is pregnant. She is not a “mother.” Calling her a “mother” is unscientific.   As is the equation of “one innocent born” human with a “preborn human.” Fetuses are NOT babies. They have the potential to become babies, to become separate human beings. But, until they are born they are a subordinate part of a woman’s body and they do not have any independent social or biological existence.

Second, calling her a “mother” reinforces the thousands of years of tradition’s chains.  Notice that the anti-abortion movement never screams at a woman, “You’ll still be a parent, you’ll just be the parent of a dead baby!” They always scream the word “mother.” Beyond being totally unscientific (as explained above), this both accepts the framework that views women as breeders of children (rather than full human beings), and uses the weight of tradition and its corresponding “cult of motherhood” to inflict guilt and judgment on women who do not submit to that tradition.

Third, to insist that even if an abortion is necessary to save a woman’s life, it should be against the law combines unscientific exaltation of the fetus with male-supremacist disregard for women.  Hence, the statement, “Although the pregnant mother… may die…” there is, “NO EXCEPTION! NO COMPROMISE!

In a part of their statement which I did not quote above, they insist that these principles be codified into an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The only difference between the implications of such an amendment and the recent “Personhood” initiative that was defeated in Mississippi last year– but which is being introduced in states across the country this year – is that such an amendment would be even more broad reaching. And let’s not forget, the Mississippi “Personhood” amendment would have criminalized miscarriages, banned all abortions, and even criminalized some forms of birth control.

As if these principles were too subtle, many of the organizers and speakers at the annual “March for Life” lay out even more extreme positions.

Nellie Gray, the March for Life’s late founder, used the March as a platform to call not only for criminalizing all abortions but for holding future Nuremberg trials against “feminist abortionists.” The implication is clear; those convicted at Nuremberg were executed.

It is inexcusable to allow this message and these political forces to dominate the political stage as we enter a new year.

Last year saw a record number of restrictions on women’s right to abortion. 92 abortion restrictions were passed, shattering the previous record of 34 restrictions passed in 2005 under President Bush. Nearly 90% of counties do not have an abortion provider.  New Year’s morning saw an abortion clinic in Pensacola, Florida set on fire. And even birth control is being restricted, including under the approving watch of the so-called “Pro-Choice President.”

Without a doubt, those marching against abortion this year will be as giddy with success as they are fanatical about going even further.

If they were to come out and own up to the program that they really are pushing, if they were to broadcast to the world that they are marching for “Forced Motherhood and Female Enslavement,” would that be enough to drive you out in the streets to counter-protest?

Now that you know their true intent, how can you sit this one out?

Be at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC this Monday, January 23rd at 11 am to: Stand Up for Abortion and Birth Control. Add your name to this Call for Action. As it says in this Call, “If 2011 marked an unprecedented escalation in the assault on women’s lives, 2012 must mark the launch of unprecedented resistance!

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

  • veggietart

    How can they be pro-life if they think it’s okay for a woman to die from pregnancy-related complications?  No compromise?  Really? 

     

  • carolrhill814

    It is truely sad what women go through that men will never ever understand that if this pregnancy is going badly and it happens and the woman could die along with the child and the she has to make decision that she feels badly about and she knows that she wants to have another baby let her make that decision without making her feel like a killer that is simply NOT fair NOT fair at all.

     

    Let say she didn’t want the child and she has the child and that child is found in garbage somewhere what do the right to lifers say NOTHING all they care about the mother didn’t have an abortion.

     

    This is why I wish all of the right to lifers should see: THE OTHERSIDE OF MIDNIGHT and see what women will go through not have babies and that should NEVER EVER be but men don’t really care they don’t have to go through anything they are there along for the ride and a lot of times they get off the ride and disappear into the dark never to return.

  • crowepps

    No compromise, because “that never happens” and “abortion is never necessary” and “doctors can always try to save them both”, all outright lies widely promulgated by those pushing a ProLife agenda and believed to really be true by ProLife activists who believe the falsehoods.

    Over 700 women die annually in the United States as a result of pregnancy and its complications, and those deaths are disproportionately concentrated among women of color.  More than 30,000 women a year nearly die, and every year, 1.7 million women suffer complications.

    http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/campaigns/demand-dignity/maternal-health-is-a-human-right/maternal-health-in-the-us?id=1351091

    In some cases, such as ectopic pregnancy and grossly malformed fetus, trying to “save them both” increases the chances that the woman will die, be permanently disabled or have her fertility negatively impacted, and does not increase the fetus’ chances of survival.

  • basiorana

    Many believe that any woman who truly loved her children would gladly sacrifice herself to save the child’s life. That it’s really, really rare to have a scenario where the baby can live at the cost of the mom is irrelevant (usually, if mom dies, both die).

  • basiorana

    While I am rabidly-pro-choice, I feel I should comment on the garbage-baby issue.

    Pro-lifers do NOT let newborn abandonment slide. They want babies of single mothers to be placed for adoption (so the kids can be raised by “moral” parents), and they will fight against mothers abandoning their children if the mothers don’t make sure that child winds up in the pro-life definition of a “good” home.

  • jennifer-starr

    And many people believe that women should be allowed to make up their own minds, rather that  being forced to live up to someone else’s idea of what they ‘should’ do. Also many pregnant women have other children ; would ‘pro-lifers’ like to see them orphaned? 

  • basiorana

    We’re talking about fundamentalists here, of course they don’t think that people should be allowed to make up their own minds.

    Besides, women/mothers are relatively interchangeble to these people; the father can just remarry, or maybe hire a nanny.