Pathetic.

http://www.godlessprolifers.org/library/trageser1…

The voice of the liberal, pro-feminist anti-abortionists is 'lost' in the debate

By Jim Trageser

As the abortion debate heats up in response to legal and political maneuvering, media coverage is again — or should I say still — presenting stories in terms of "liberal" pro-choicers and "conservative" (or even "right-wing") pro-lifers.

Lost on the mainstream media is the fact that there exists a large number of liberal, even leftist, pro-feminist activists and organizations opposed to non-therapeutic abortion.

In fact, so inexcusably poor has media coverage been, the existence of a large, well-organized leftist anti-abortion movement would probably be a surprise to many activists on both sides of the issue.

The reasons for the slanted coverage are all-too-human: Abortion is an issue which instills great passion; few of us outside Clarence Thomas have not formed an opinion on abortion, and this includes reporters.

According to an in-depth Los Angeles Times investigative series in 1990, the vast majority — over 80 percent — of newspaper, television and radio reporters favor legalized abortion. And, with almost an equal number considering themselves "liberal" or "leftist" it is natural that reporters' perceptions of the abortion issue are likely to be skewed toward their own experiences.

All of the above leads one to the conclusion that the existence of a leftist opposition to abortion would be troubling, if not embarrassing, to a great many reporters who then, perhaps subconsciously, avoid dealing with the issue.

But while the establishment Left, such as it is represented by the Democratic Party and its allies, imposes abortion loyalty oaths and litmus tests, groups such as Feminists for Life, the Pro-Life Association of Gays & Lesbians and the Seamless Garment Network, and individuals such as Ken Kesey and Nat Hentoff, continue to speak out against abortion from an authentically leftist viewpoint.

This leftist opposition is based on stripping away the euphemisms and recognizing abortion as an act of violence, the very taking of a life. As such, it is clearly incompatible with a philosophy which holds sacred all life, as manifested in the growing environmentalist and animal-rights movements of the Left.

Pro-life leftists believe that a legally sanctioned killing, whether it be the execution of an adult criminal or an unwanted fetus, violates the tenets of liberation and freedom.

It is a secular belief that legalized abortion is no more than Reaganomics incarnate, the ultimate manifestation of materialism and America's acceptance of Madison Avenue's vision of society: If you aren't a consumer, then you do not exist.

Leftist opposition to abortion recognizes that whenever the value of human life is lowered, there are invariably repercussions throughout society, leading to a lower value on each of our lives. The growing violence in our society, the increasing number of hate crimes, the wave of intolerance of gays and lesbians, and the seeming antipathy of many toward environmental concerns go hand in hand with society's devaluation of unborn human life. If not a cause and effect relationship, the above certainly reinforce each other.

In short, to capture the essence of leftist opposition to abortion as a form of birth control, one might say thus: A house of freedom cannot be built on a foundation of violence.

If the media's silence on leftist anti-abortion activity and thought is a crime of omission, the establishment Left's efforts are not so benign.

While many were shocked at the American Civil Liberties Union's support of police abuse of anti-abortion protestors, numerous efforts by other supposedly liberal/leftist organizations to squelch dissent went mostly unnoticed:

At a "Take Back the Night" anti-crime rally in Rochester, N.Y., this past October, the National Organization for Women told the local chapter of the FFL that it could not be a co-sponsor because of FFL's opposition to abortion. FFL marched anyway, 60 women strong.

This past year, the Minnesota Peace and Justice Coalition, in a closed meeting, expelled JustLife Minnesota, a local chapter of the Seamless Garment Network (which opposes all violence, including the death penalty, war, poverty and euthanasia). This despite vehement protest from several other Coalition member organizations and the Coalition's own statement of purpose, which includes a pledge to "challenge each other on issues of inclusivity … and subjects controversial within the peace and justice community."

Perhaps the most egregious example of an establishment organization censoring dissent was the recent case of the liberal/left publication the Utne Reader refusing to run an ad from the FFL. The advertisement, which quoted early feminist opposition to abortion by leaders such as Matilda Gage, was refused on the grounds that "… henceforth advertising must reflect editorial views." (This followed a dishonest and failed attempt to claim FFL had quoted Gage out of context.)

In all the above cases, and dozens more like them detailed in FFL's (now defunct) quarterly magazine, SisterLife, the common tactic of the establishment Left is to claim that anti-abortion leftists are not true leftists. In other words, they are excommunicated as heretics.

What should be truly disturbing to all of us is this dogmatic approach shared by most members of the establishment Left: One is a liberal or leftist based (at least partly) on one's position on abortion.

A truly intellectual approach would, of course, be the obverse: As a leftist, how does my value system prepare me to deal with the question of abortion?

Without such a non-dogmatic approach, we are susceptible to sociological schizophrenia, condemning the violence of rape, domestic violence, militarism and capital punishment on one hand while denying the violent nature of abortion on the other.

The anti-abortion Left offers a vision in which one may oppose the violence inherent to abortion and also support issues of gender justice and other progressive causes, and in which one opposes abortion not in spite of one's leftist value system, but as a result of it.

From this leftist viewpoint, opposition to abortion is not an aberration, but a natural, organic and logical outgrowth of one's leftist whole. In other words, we oppose abortion for the same reasons we oppose violence against women, gays and lesbians, or ethnic minorities. Our anti-abortionism is the only response possible with our dedication to and demand for social justice.

In the end, it is the establishment Left which is resorting to the tactics of extremism: applying dogmatic loyalty tests, employing exclusivity by branding all dissidents as disloyal or heretical, and using intimidation tactics to silence the opposition.

It is difficult to find anything much progressive about that.

The problem is that you are actually the exception to the rule rather than the rule itself.

There are liberal pro-lifers, like you said. But consider this: many of such in fact bemoan how liberals at the whole are in favor of abortion on demand.

An example here:

http://www.godlessprolifers.org/library/trageser4…

The Left's surrender on issues of human value

By Jim Trageser

Time was, folks calling themselves progressives dismissed any attempts to quantify — or even qualify — the value of human life as inherently right-wing. Whether fighting child labor in Pennsylvania or battling Franco in Catalan, advocating for women's suffrage in Britain or exposing Hitler's eugenics program to an unwilling world, it was progressives who argued that human beings had a value intrinsic to their mere existence. That we didn't need a God or a king to grant us value — we possessed it by the mere fact that we lived.

And that we had obligations to one another; that to threaten any of us was to threaten us all. That no one ever had a right to inflict harm on another except in self-defense.

Those days are, sadly, long gone. In fact, the term "progressive" is hardly recognizable anymore what with so many who claim the heritage of the Left instead advocating policies drawn from the furthest reaches of the right.

From abortion to assisted suicide, there is a steady erosion of leftist support for the value of human life. Especially on the issue of abortion, where the mass of those claiming to be of the Left offering vociferous support for a "woman's right to privacy."

But there is nothing at all progressive about abortion — it is as reactionary a practice as one could imagine.

Indeed, its main early proponent in the United States was an open admirer of Adolf Hitler. Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, proposed many of the same policies Hitler implemented.

It was Sanger, in her 1922 book "Pivot of Civilization," who called for sterilizing blacks, Asians and Latinos. It was Sanger who, in 1934, called for a one-child policy in China — not to improve the lives of the Chinese, but to stop "the incessant fertility of [the Chinese] millions spread like a plague."

The only difference between "Mein Kampf" and Sanger's book is that Hitler has been disgraced by history, while Sanger remains respectable.

So respectable, in fact, that even her more outrageous suggestions are now becoming accepted policy.

Many self-proclaimed "progressives" now advocate "assisted suicide" for those with a "diminished quality of life."

But when asked to define that quality of life, it inevitably comes down to consumerist values right out of the Brady Bunch: being physically or mentally disabled in such a way that one is no longer seen as normal or enjoying the material benefits of modern society.

Or worse, lives are deemed unworthy of living when they can be sustained only through dependancy on others.

But is it not the open and honest recognition that we are ALL interdependent that is at the heart of a progressive value system? That none of us can exist without our brothers and sisters? That, indeed, no man is an island?

It is the exact opposite that is the basic philosophy behind abortion: I am an island, sovereign to myself, with no obligations to the greater society around me. I can do with my body what I like and nobody has a right to say otherwise.

It is, in fact, the same right-wing individualism (often dressed up today as libertarianism) that drives the militia movement. It is the same set of reactionary values that was used to justify slavery, child labor and treating women as property. We've gone from "It's my plantation, I can do what I want with it" to "It's my factory, mind your own business" right up through "This is my home, you have no say how I treat her" to the present "It's my body and I can do what I want."

Whether one agrees with the sentiment or not, it is clearly not one based on the progressive values of community, interdependency and respect for one another.

What it does have in its favor at a political level is its appeal to the consumerist mentality of the ruling white middle class. Two generations of American bourgoise have been conditioned by Madison Avenue (through television and glossy magazines) to believe that they have a god-given right to full material happiness — and anything (or anyone) who gets in the way of that is shit out of luck.

And it's that class that populates and runs the national media and university faculties.

What is shameful is that many progressives believe as I do — that abortion is simply another manifestation of social inequality and America's inclination to solve all problems with violence — yet don't speak out. With the Politically Correct movement acting as all fascists do and bullying anyone who dares to question or challenge, too many progressives have allowed themselves to be silenced out of fear.

An unwanted pregnancy? No different than an unwanted CD player — simply get rid of it and go on to the next commodity.

When abortion opponents warned 25 years ago that Roe vs. Wade would result in a steady erosion of societal value for human life, they were scoffed at. Today we have Jack Kevorkian killing off people whose primary illness is depression and driving around L.A. with their organs in an ice chest, hawking them to the first taker.

This is progressive?

It is fascism, born of the same American shallowness that gave us child labor and chattel slavery. Twenty-five years after we legalized killing our own unborn offspring, we now have the government imposing the death penalty on children and the retarded, doctors proposing that we withhold food from handicapped infants, and parents suing hospitals for NOT aborting their children.

Where's Josef Mengele when you need him?

Out here in California, the two most "liberal" candidates for higher office (Barbara Boxer and Gray Davis) in 1998 both ran on a consistent death ethic: they support the death penalty, abortion and welfare reform.

This is progressive?

To be sure, there are remnants of the old-style Left still out there fighting for the little person. Maya Angelou and Nat Hentoff, for instance. Phillip and Daniel Berrigan. Martin Sheen. Eunice and Sargent Shriver.

But the vast majority of those claiming to be leftist are far too busy marketing their politics of materialism to the white middle class to be bothered with defending the voiceless.

.

Let me give you a hint: if you want people 1) to take you serious and 2) to not think you are a cruel, callous person, don't trivialize abortion, where there is life that is involved that is snuff out. Yes, granted you can say that it is to save your life. Many of us can understand that. But don't brag about it or make it something to be proud of for the whole world to see and celebrate. That is if you want people to not think you are off the deep end.

If her life was truly I danger (though she was not forthcoming as to what these risks were), then the baby would've died anyway. But the coldheartedness of her words, and the slurs against her baby and his/her suporters is aggrivating.

I am sorry for your loss and hope you find healing and solace. If nothing else, I'm glad you've had the opportunity to share this experience now and I hope your friends and readers are supportive.