Anti-Choice Group Sends Graphic Mailers Comparing Abortion Providers to ‘Hired Killers’ (UPDATED)

Update, 1:45 p.m. ET: Life Dynamics President Mark Crutcher posted an image of both sides of the flyer (warning: extremely graphic) on his Facebook page Friday afternoon, with the following caption (emphasis added):

“What we did is created a post card called Hired Killers. This postcard is designed to discourage doctors from getting involved in abortion. We sent one of these to every doctor’s office in Texas. What we are trying to do is keep the waters stirred because what the abortion industry wants is to recruit these guys and tell them, you can just slide in and you don’t have to raise a big ruckus about it. We’re making sure that these doctors understand, there will be a ruckus and this is just the first shot of the ruckus that’s coming.”

An anti-choice organization in Texas says it mailed flyers referring to doctors who provide abortions as “hired killers” to every doctor’s office in the state. The president of the same group also says he sent a letter to all Texas hospitals discouraging them from providing admitting privileges to doctors who perform abortions.

According to the San Antonio Express-News, the flyers sent by the Denton-based group Life Dynamics feature on one side an image of “what appears to be an aborted fetus.” The text on other side of the flyer reads:

Hired Killers

In the movies, they walk around with silenced handguns inside aluminum briefcases.

But in reality, the most prolific killing machine the world has ever known uses cannulas and forceps.

And today, they are out to recruit …


The Austin Chronicle reports that the letter sent to hospitals by Life Dynamics President Mark Crutcher claims that most doctors who provide abortion services in the state “do not have [admitting] privileges and cannot get them” because “the competence and character of practitioners who work at abortion clinics is inevitably substandard,” among other reasons. NARAL Pro-Choice America noted on Facebook that many of the claims made in the letter are either unsubstantiated or false.

Life Dynamics says on its website that its direct mailer campaigns are used to “[alert] doctors and medical students to the stigma that attaches to abortionists.” Crutcher, an anti-choice activist, speaker, author, and director, said in an April 2005 interview that he wanted his organization to focus on “counter-intelligence or intelligence-gathering” of abortion providers and pro-choice organizations.

The mailings come in the wake of the passage of HB 2, an omnibus anti-abortion law that requires doctors who provide abortions to obtain admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic where they perform procedures. The Supreme Court recently ruled that the state will be able to enforce the admitting privileges provision of the law while it faces a legal challenge. The law has forced a number of reproductive health-care clinics around the state to stop providing abortions.

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

For more information or to schedule an interview with contact

Follow Teddy Wilson on twitter: @txindyjourno

  • outrageous

    Terrorism pure and simple.

  • ChynnaBlue

    At least one person called him out for using the phrase “this is just the first shot” against abortion providers. Boy, these people…

  • L-dan

    And the lies.

    “most doctors who provide abortion services in the state “do not have
    [admitting] privileges and cannot get them” because “the competence and
    character of practitioners who work at abortion clinics is inevitably

    That is untrue both regarding the reason admitting privileges are difficult to impossible to obtain and in characterizing their work as inevitably substandard. But we’re used to endless lying.

    • Arekushieru

      They still can’t get it into their heads that the ones who perform abortions are OB/GYNS, can they?

      • dildo depot

        Ob/gyns who want to make mad cash off abortion. Which is why these ob/gyns oppose trap laws..however I have been reassured that the pro-liars behind the trap laws are genuinely concerned about women’s health and not at all biased. Even tho they are not enacting trap laws for dental or plastic surgery offices…

        • CJ99

          Cause religious fanatics love plastic surgery. Look at every televangelists wife. Rexella Van Impe is a prime example, the only thing more fake than her Phd is her face. She’s got more plastic than a lego factory.

          • dildo depot

            Wanna help me and others with some particularly odious forced birthes?

          • CJ99

            I’ll pass, that’s worse than brussel sprounts covered in calculus. & I really hate calculus, took it 4 times in college with aspirin being my fave study aid every time.

          • dildo depot

            Yeah, I always get myself involved in horrible ‘debates’ with asshats who act deliberately obtuse and play word games…but I can never just ‘let it go’ because they are spewing lies and propaganda.

          • CJ99

            I know the feeling. being a guy the urge to kick butt comes fast & hard. But I’m trying to cut down on my stress a bit. Though I do see your point about not letting crap go unchallenged.

          • Quis ut Deus

            yeah. it stresses me out but I often cannot let it go:(

          • CJ99

            I know how that is. theres things in my own personal history that are still GRRRR years later!

          • HeilMary1

            LOL! “She’s got more plastic than a lego factory.”

            I’m stealing that!

          • CJ99

            go ahead mary, I’d put a copyLEFT on it if I could ;P

      • dildo depot
        • Arekushieru

          UGH, I absolutely DESPISE Stephen Woodworth. Another one I hate is Brent Rathgeber.

    • CJ99

      Religious fanatics have never let the real world get in their way right up until it runs them over.

    • colleen2

      The medical personnel I try to avoid are the ‘pro-life’ folks, especially the folks who are paid to testify. There are few things more disgusting than listening to the testimony of a ‘pro-life’ doctor talking about about how a little 8 year old girl can easily survive a full term pregnancy. Folks like that are no better than the rapist ‘father’ responsible. But, then, the ‘pro-life’ movement appears to believe that rape including child rape is normal and no more significant than a speeding ticket. I suppose it’s understandable. Look at the quality of ‘men’ they receive their moral instruction from. I would lie too.

  • fiona64

    This is nothing short of communicating a terrorist threat via the US Postal Service — which is a crime.

    • Quis ut Deus

      I need to vent to someone.

      Beth Clarkson is a self-righteous, morally superior….b word.

      I am with Alix all the way.

      Those fuckers drove away Olive, who was one of the nicest, warmest, most sensitive posters. All because they have essentially fetishized ‘civil discourse’.

      It’s insulting.

      • fiona64


        • Quis ut Deus

          I checked her profile.

          She has a link to her own website.

          She is in love with her own intellect


      • Jennifer Starr

        Very insulting.

  • HeilMary1

    Crutcher is probably a pedophile.

  • Ella Warnock

    Ruckus can run both ways, Mark Crutcher. May you live in interesting times.

  • P. McCoy

    And what do we do to terrorists. We imprison them and break them financially. Time to take the WAR to THEM

  • painkills2

    Sounds like this flyer should be designated as offensive porn, in which I believe there are limits as to how public such images can be. If the flyer had a swastika superimposed over a doctor’s picture (which is basically the message of this group), wouldn’t the FBI investigate?

    • Arekushieru

      Painkills, in a city not too far from where I live (in Alberta, Canada), there was a woman doing EXACTLY this. It was disgusting.

      • dildo depot

        I am in b.c. hugs!

        • Ella Warnock

          We’re going to Victoria for Christmas. Love BC.

      • painkills2

        Bonjour Canada! Sorry America’s right-wing nonsense has migrated to your neck of the woods. The other side is getting desperate, eh?

        • dildo depot

          Canadian pro liars have a van covered in pix of dead fetuses…and they travel around the country in it.

          • CJ99

            If they show up in ontario they can expect flat tires, toilet papering & more than a few rotten veggies decorating that van. Funny thing is if the van was plastered in pics of naked women I’d expect it to be pulled over nearly constantly but dead fetuses? no prob apparantly.

          • Shan

            If the van was plastered in pics of women who’d died like Gerri Santoro, the thing wouldn’t just be pulled over, it would be towed and impounded. And there would probably be some obscenity charges filed.

          • goatini

            No kidding.

          • Quis ut Deus

            You bring up a good point. If the van had photos of dead women and children etc etc you had better believe there would be a bigger outcry.

            Why is it that people find fetal pron to be offensive, but not AS offensive as images of war and so on?

            Could it be because most people really don’t view fetuses as full fledged human beings?

          • CJ99

            that’s related to something I’ve often wondered about action movies. there’s plenty of fight scenes of all kinds, people being discombobulated by shrapnel & gunfire is apparantly no problemo but disrobing with less violent / mutual contact is met with loads of SHOCK HORROR!

          • HeilMary1

            Or how about pics of abandoned obstetric fistula victims carrying bowls between their legs?

          • painkills2

            That van was here in New Mexico this month, but I think most people just ignored it. I don’t understand their marketing campaign strategy, but then I don’t understand them either.

          • dildo depot

            Stephanie Grey is the leader.

            Her top anti-abortion argument is this: “the uterus was made for the baby, therefore abortion is wrong”

          • painkills2

            Oh, the anti-choice side has a lot of interesting arguments, but they are not based on fact, only religion. It is hard to convince an atheist that a god made anything, let alone determined the purpose of my uterus.

          • dildo depot

            The secular arguments, in the end, just sound like religious arguments.

            Only ‘soul’ is replaced with ‘life begins at conception, everything that you will become is in the zygote’ etc etc

          • lady_black

            It is patently absurd to say that “everything you will become is in the zygote.” It’s a lie. Everything you will become requires a vast amount of development, before and after birth and consumes a tremendous amount of resources that just aren’t present in a zygote. A zygote is meaningless without everything that comes after. It will become NOTHING.

          • CJ99

            They willfully ignore the fact that its yours (not theirs) and you get to choose how & when it gets used, not anybody else. I’d certainly be in a huge GRRR mood if some1 decided to hijack my lovejunk without asking.

          • painkills2

            Lovejunk? First time I’ve heard that term and I think I like it. :)

          • CJ99

            Just thought of something a little less sterile than the usual terms.

          • Arekushieru

            Then where is her argument that a vagina was made for a penis therefore sex can never be rape (bleagh! Vomited as I typed that)?

          • goatini

            There is a vast group of people that STILL believe exactly THIS.

          • Arekushieru

            Yeah, but you never see the antis actually openly admitting to that, even when they do realize what they advocate for actually entails. At least, I’ve never seen it happen!

          • dildo depot

            I came across another rebuttal to ‘nature is destiny’ :

            “The womb, and a woman’s body, have natural features that specifically
            exist to accommodate an unborn human. Thus, each one that implants into
            a womb has a right to be there, and should not be aborted.” BAD DATA,
            since that argument ignores the fact that equally-natural miscarriages
            do occur. Some of them happen so soon after implantation that they are
            called “late periods” instead of “miscarriages”. Also, there is
            something known as “Rh-factor rejection”, an incompatibility between the
            mother’s immune system and the unborn human, that almost always causes a
            miscarriage, unless modern medical technology is employed to intervene.
            Such a thing would never happen if that argument was completely valid.


            Also, there exists a completely different mechanism by which a
            mother’s body might kill an unborn human, “fetal resorption”. This
            phenomenon is fairly common in kangaroos; when the environment is poor
            in food, a pregnant kangaroo will literally suck out the life –and body–
            of its womb-inhabitant, until nothing remains. Other mammals can
            accomplish fetal resorption as well, including humans (rarely).

   … /Vitamins_in_Animal_and_Human_Nutrition.pdf

            The existence of fetal resorption means one thing that drives at the heart of a significant number of anti-abortion arguments: It is perfectly natural for the unborn to be killed if conditions aren’t adequate for supporting it.
            And growing humans happen to need more support –especially after birth–
            than any other species, by a wide margin. Who is best situated to
            determine whether or not a particular unborn human can be adequately
            supported? Certainly not the average abortion opponent!

            Then there is the fact that a pregnancy is perfectly natural mindless
            biology in action. Do humans claim subservience to natural mindless
            biology, or do they claim superiority over natural mindless biology? If
            subservient, then why are medical procedures from immunizations to
            heart-bypass surgery tolerated? If subservient, then, whenever you
            happen to walk near a swamp, and a mosquito flies out to suck your
            blood, you have no right to swat it!

            But if we humans claim superiority over natural mindless biology, then why should any woman be required or even be expected
            to carry a pregnancy to term? It is pure hypocrisy (and K-strategy
            prejudice) to think one should be able to take a pill or have an
            operation, to deal with some unwanted natural-mindless-biological aspect
            of the body, like cancer — while also thinking that an
            unwanted/involuntary pregnancy is somehow different than
            natural/mindless/biological, and requires subservience even if unwanted.”


            And kudos to you for repeatedly pointing out that pregnancy cannot be ‘consented’ to – even if you WANT to be pregnant, due to the fact that the process of fertilization and implantation are SELF-DIRECTED and the woman’s will has no influence on the outcome.

          • Arekushieru

            “Also, there exists a completely different mechanism by which a
            mother’s body might kill an unborn human, “fetal resorption”. This
            phenomenon is fairly common in kangaroos; when the environment is poor in food, a pregnant kangaroo will literally suck out the life –and body– of its womb-inhabitant, until nothing remains. Other mammals can accomplish fetal resorption as well, including humans (rarely).”

            Yep! And the opposite also happens in humans! If we were to disassociate all kind of care from pregnancy because it would be just as ‘unnatural’ as having an abortion, meaning a woman was continuing to eat as she did prior to her pregnancy, not making any special adjustments to the change in her condition, the fetus would eventually suck all the calcium out of her and absorb it into its own body.

            “”…It is pure hypocrisy (and K-strategy prejudice) to think one should be able to take a pill or have an operation, to deal with some unwanted natural-mindless-biological aspect of the body, like cancer — while also thinking that an unwanted/involuntary pregnancy is somehow different than natural/mindless/biological, and requires subservience even if unwanted.””

            Not sure if this is what K-strategy prejudice refers to, but, either way, I’m going to affirm that this is triple edged hypocrisy. They make pregnancy sound like a natural/mindless/biological process, but then, in order to justify why abortion should be illegal in the face of mountains of evidence that point to other natural/mindless/biological processes that aren’t illegal, they claim that pregnancy is somehow different than that, but still believe that it should make women subservient to that, even, in turn, in the face of reams of evidence that unnatural/’mindful’/inorganic processes don’t require subservience, THEN (and this is the frosting on the triple iced cake) they claim that all this somehow puts women on a higher level than other animals…. Their hypocrisy just knows no end to the extremes…. *Sigh*

            “And kudos to you for repeatedly pointing out that pregnancy cannot be ‘consented’ to – even if you WANT to be pregnant, due to the fact that the process of fertilization and implantation are SELF-DIRECTED and the woman’s will has no influence on the outcome.”

            You just put a group of words into their most succinct and to the point form that expresses that selfsame concept way better than any other (which includes myself) I’ve seen. THANK you!

            You know, it has just occurred to me that those who say pregnancy can’t be forcibly maintained because it’s that ‘natural process’ (again), are actually using the same argument that justifies that pregnancy can’t be CONSENTED to, either. That argument is mainly being used to undercut the very core of the Pro-Choice argument, by making it look as arbitrary and ridiculous as possible, through extreme methods. Well, if we use THEIR argument against them, they either have to accept that if pregnancy isn’t forced, neither can women consent to the action of the pregnancy as it is happening, which means the core of their argument is immediately undercut, *by their own logic*, OR they have to accept that force and consent require a few more qualifications than just natural vs unnatural processes.

            Finally, a uterus and a vagina are two different organs, ruled by (at least) two very different processes. Would they say that the heart and lungs are ruled by the same processes? If not, then hypocrites.

          • DD

            Not sure if this is what K-strategy prejudice refers to

            “In this context, r-selection makes a species prone to numerous reproduction at low cost per individual offspring, while K-selected
            species expend high cost in reproduction for a low number of more
            difficult to produce offspring. Neither mode of propagation is intrinsically superior, and in fact they can coexist in the same
            habitat, as in rodents and elephants”


          • cjvg

            I have been following this conversation between you and Arekushieru and I absolutely am in love with the science dissed out here, brilliant
            (geek alert,I have a bit of a weakness for medical science rebuttals)

            will post this to both of you

          • DD

            I love scientific rebuttals as well – which is why I pick your brain:P

            99% of the time the pro-lifer is rendered speechless

            The most dangerous ones, however, are the people who have a little bit of training in biology, which they think gives them the right to say that a blastocyst is a baby.

          • cjvg

            That statement in itself disqualifies them as a thinking individual who is capable of honest debate.
            In that vein of reasoning a toddler must be the same as an adult, and we should just let them have a drivers license, vote and drink booze

          • Quis ut Deus

            Beth Clarkson is a self important asshole.

          • cjvg

            Thanks, just now saw this post, and yeah I agree wholeheartedly.

          • marshmallow

            Privileged people are generally the ones who choose to tone troll the rest of us. Did you see that article on pandagon about smarm and snark? If not, please go read it!

          • cjvg

            I did see that.
            I love that column and usually read it when I get around to checking my internet favorites

          • marshmallow

            Hey, are you familiar with a neuroscientist who goes by the name of Maureen Condic?

            I am trying to improve my arguments, and came across this:


            She is basically saying that beating heart cadavers are ‘alive’ because their heart beats thanks to the brainstem…therefore they are ‘fully coordinated living beings’ – and an embryo is no different.

            I mean, she’s basing her entire argument on a technicality…

            And she says that molar pregnancies etc are not comparable as ‘human and alive’ to a viable fertilization because:

            “Despite an initial (superficial) similarity to embryos, hydatidiform
            moles do not start out as embryos and later transform into tumors, they are intrinsically tumors from their initiation. Moreover, they are not frustrated embryos that are “trying” (yet unable) to develop normally. Just as a CD recording of “Twinkle, twinkle little star” is not somehow thwarted in its attempt to play the “Alphabet song” by a deficiency of notes in the fourth measure …, hydatidiform moles are not “blocked”
            from proceeding along an embryonic path of development by a lack of maternally-imprinted DNA. Rather, hydatidiform moles are manifesting their own inherent properties—the properties of a tumor. Even in the optimal environment for embryonic development (the uterus), hydatidiform moles produce disordered growths, indicating they are not limited by
            environment, but rather by their own intrinsic nature; a nature that does not rise to the level of an organism…

            If the necessary structures (molecules, genes etc.) required for
            development (i.e., an organismal level of organization) do not exist in an entity from the beginning, the entity is intrinsically incapable of being an organism and is therefore not a human being. Such entities are undergoing a cellular process that is fundamentally different from human development and are not human embryos. [emphasis hers]”

            But cancer IS an organism, isn’t it? I am asking you, for starters, because I don’t know the first thing about cancers and whatnot, and I want to be sure that they do in fact qualify as *human organisms* just as a zygote does.

            And from reading about somatic cells, it seems that they would certain qualify as an organism, and especially when you get to the cloning part:


            “In recent years, the technique of cloning whole organisms has been developed in mammals, allowing almost identical genetic clones of an animal to be produced. One method of doing this is called “somatic cell nuclear transfer” and involves removing the nucleus from a somatic cell, usually a skin cell. This nucleus contains all of the genetic information needed to produce the organism it was removed from. This nucleus is then injected into an ovum of the same species which has had its own genetic material removed. The ovum now no longer needs to be fertilized, because it contains the correct amount of genetic material (a diploid number of chromosomes). In theory, the ovum can be implanted into the uterus of a same-species animal and allowed to develop.”


            So it would seem that a somatic cell contains everything that is necessary to form a new ‘organism’ it just needs a little help. But all of the genetic information is there.

            If you don’t know enough about the subject that’s ok, I realize your sphere of study is different, but I *really* want to improve my arguments, and it bothers me that I lack all of the knowledge necessary to argue with complete conviction.

            It is very important that I am arguing from *truth* and not just what sounds good.

          • marshmallow


            Hmm, looks like she was only talking about complete hydaditiform moles, and not the partial ones…

            And if we think about it, why shouldn’t we consider a hydaditiform zygote to be a disabled child? Like down syndrome? I mean, that’s what it is, no? With some tinkering, the disabled ‘child’ could be cured, yes? I mean, we don’t look at a DS child and say ‘aw, ze has an abnormal # of chromosomes, ze is not inherently human’ – then why do we do this with a hydatidiform mole? *

            *totes misspelling hydaditiform here but it’s a crazy word to retype so many times!

          • marshmallow

            This sounds a little crackpotty but eh:


            Cancers are much more intelligent than previously thought. For instance, they manipulate normal functions of blood and immune cells to their advantage. At times, the cancer behaves like an organism rather than a group of rebel individual cells.
            This is similar to microbes that can join together into a fruiting
            body, behaving as if they are a multicellular organism, and then
            separate again into individual cells (see post Social Microbes). For microbes and cancer cells to behave as a community of cells, or as a multicellular organism, there is elaborate communication and decision-making. It is not known if cancer cells use gene transfer with virus like particles or viruses, as most microbes do.

            Just like other cells and organisms, we have to wonder how
            much the cancer cell and organism knows? Does it, like all the other levels of organisms that we have investigated, also have some form of mental capacity?

          • cjvg

            Give me some time to look into this,( i’m going to be out of town etc for the holidays) do some more research as well as bounce some ideas of some fellow researchers n contact with first. I will get back to you on this

          • marshmallow

            Thank you so much for taking the time!

            I really really appreciate it.

            I’m just OCD about having the absolute best arguments grounded in scientific FACT.

          • cjvg

            I have been following this conversation between you and DD and I absolutely am in love with the science dissed out here.
            will post this to both of you

          • CJ99

            Which is as logical as a baby giving birth to itself.

          • Arekushieru

            ROTFLMFFAO! I don’t know whether you INTENTIONALLY drew that image of a baby giving birth to itself from the juxtaposition of a uterus being ‘made’ for it, or not, but nonetheless, it hit my funny bone!

          • CJ99

            In the words of peewee herman: I meant to do that. I said it as a sarcastic way just showing the silliness of the unborn meaning far more to the religious wrong than people who are already born.

          • dildo depot
          • Arekushieru

            I LOVE Joyce Arthur! She’s a FB friend!

  • Shan

    The “fetus porn” picture on the flier is a lie. It’s most definitely not of a 10wk fetus. At 10wks, it would be only about an inch long, roughly two dimes (for comparison against the dime in the photo). The one in the picture is at least three times that size, well into the 2nd trimester. One would hope that the medical professionals they’re mailing this garbage to would know that.

    • lady_black

      I don’t know… I knew that wasn’t a 10 week fetus. That would be about the size of a lima bean.

  • CJ99

    Perhaps a class action defamation suit against the producers of this offensive propaganda is in order.

  • Kizi jogos

    I actually saw abortion is actually a very big crime. This led to many consequences for both the individual and society pregnant again. Really, this should be avoided rather than brought into form as the current business

    • JamieHaman

      English is not your first language?
      No sane person is “pro-abortion.” No sane person goes around advocating that “today is a good day to get an abortion.”
      Readily available birth control, and accurate information are the best ways to prevent abortion.
      Deliberately lying about the procedure, lying about the consequences only muddy the situation. It harms everyone to lie. It is dangerous to accept a lie as well.

      • dildo depot

        I usually feel bad about mocking those with poor English skills but if they are hating women in ESL – fuck ’em. I have no mercy.

        • cjvg

          Hate is hate, even if they use bad spelling it should not be allowed to spread its ugly tendrils in the world

          • CJ99

            Exactamundo, no self rightous fiend should hide behind their “hukt on fonix”.

    • dildo depot
    • CJ99

      In which case you need to visit an eye doctor urgently. bear in mind they cannot treat your willfull blindness.

  • CJ99

    something thats been rumbling through my mind since I 1st saw this is that such imagry would be villified by those now producing it if it was introduced in a horror movie, comic book, or in any other fiction based media and wouldn’t be viewable by children anyways. but apparantly plastering it on a van & driving around in front of everyone including kids to make their sick point is somehow praiseworthy to them. The stink of hypocrisy is so strong I need a gas mask.

  • DD

    Posting this here, because it’s bullshit.

    We hear from one of our fellow pro-choicers that we must not mis-reprsent and dehumanize the other side…


    Which is why we only get people here at RHRC who wish deat to s1uts. And 12 year olds who asked for it.

    And it’s apt, considering the subject of this article.

    Misrepersent pro-lifers my ass.

    • Arekushieru

      Libby Anne is AWESOME, if she is who I think she is. I mean, isn’t she the woman who wrote the post about the reason why she became Pro-Choice? She’s an AWESOME person. While I do disagree with her on some of her points, this person has shown that she’s very willing to learn. And that’s SO rare in today’s world.

      • DD

        Yep. I posted the link because some of our regulars also post at ljf.