|
POINT OF VIEW
by Thomas A. Glessner, J.D.
For more than twenty years I have been involved with the Pro-Life movement. One observation has become increasingly clear. While the volunteers in the three thousand crisis pregnancy centers nationwide do the vast majority of pro-life work on a day-to-day basis, the general public views the Pro-Life movement itself as a political movement. Indeed, one thing that prevents pastors from speaking out is their aversion to appearing "too political." Similarly, many laypersons are reluctant to get involved in what they see as a political cause.
Yes, politics is important. I arrived in Washington, D.C., in 1987 believing in our political cause. I still do. In fact, I do not believe it to be an exaggeration to say that the future of legalized abortion very well may hinge on the results of this November's election.
But the abortion issue goes to a much deeper level than that of legal reform. The fact that our society permits abortion on demand is a symptom of a cultural and spiritual sickness that must be addressed outside the political arena. A change in the law will not end abortion if the hearts and minds of the public, both within and without the religious communities, are not changed.
That the Pro-Life movement has mistakenly put too much hope upon a political solution to ending abortion is clear. We need to send pro-life men and women to Congress and elect a pro-life President. But such efforts will not cure the cultural sickness that began spreading decades before the 1973 decision of Roe v. Wade. History proves this point.
Shortly after Ronald Reagan was elected president in 1980 on a pro-life platform, the Senate voted on the Hatch Amendment, a constitutional amendment to reverse Roe v. Wade. The measure failed 50 to 49. Compare this outcome with the vote on a "sense of the Senate" resolution in the fall of 1999. The resolution addressed the issue of whether or not Roe was correctly decided by the Supreme Court in 1973. The vote was 51 senators supporting Roe and 48 senators opposing -- virtually no change from the vote on the Hatch Amendment. After twenty years of intense pro-life political activity, we have failed to add to our numbers on Capitol Hill.
In 1994, Americans overwhelmingly elected a pro-life Congress. Some very good men and women are now serving as our political leaders because of this election. Yet, despite the existence of pro-life sentiment, our movement still cannot drum up enough votes to defeat President Clinton's vetoes of the bills to ban partial-birth abortions.
We should not stop our political efforts. In fact, we should become more vigorously involved. This struggle will take decades, perhaps a lifetime, to resolve. Rather than becoming discouraged, we should strengthen our commitment to teach the truth to our children and grandchildren.
For now, the work of crisis pregnancy centers goes on. We are seeing results. Abortion numbers are dropping. Many centers have converted to medical clinics and are performing ultrasound tests. These centers are reporting dramatic increases in the influx of abortion-minded women and the number of abortion-minded women who are choosing life.
So in this political year, I urge you to get involved. Support and vote for candidates who will stand for life. We must elect a new generation of political leadership to help us change the tragic law that has allowed the killing of 1.2 million unborn children a year. Only by doing this can we hope to bring an end to abortion in America.
Thomas Glessner is the President of the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates. For details, contact NIFLA, P. O. Box 42060, Fredericksburg, VA 22404, phone: (540)785-9853.
|
