Dads Against the Divorce IndustryDA*DI is devoted to reinstating the societal valuation of Marriage and the traditional, nuclear American Family, with particular emphasis on the essential role of FATHERS. DA*DI offers contemporary reports and commentary on culture; its aberrations and its heroes. |
January 24, 2000
The sisterhood, 27 years laterBarbara Curtis
Twenty-seven years ago, nine
black-robed men handed feminists a triumph that would try our souls,
and — I have come to believe — find them
wanting.
On Jan. 22, 1973, when the
"Sisterhood is Powerful" crowd rejoiced at the outcome of Roe vs.
Wade, I was with them — a Washington radical feminist
scholar/abortion rights advocate, much in demand as a spokeswoman by
virtue of my motherhood. After all, who better to illustrate the
righteous need for abortion than a young woman with a future,
already encumbered by a 3-year-old in day
care?
Five years later in San
Francisco, that same little girl clutched my hand as we struggled
against the chilly Van Ness Avenue wind on our way to some
euphemistically styled "women's health
clinic."
"Samantha," I explained,
ever the politically vigilant parent, "Mommy is pregnant. But since
Jasmine's only 2 and I'm not married anymore, this just isn't a good
time to have a baby. We're lucky women have a
choice."
I was proud of the legacy
we would leave my daughter's generation. Thanks to the second wave
of feminism, abortion was now available, accessible and not much
worse than a trip to the dentist. Paid for by the state of
California, to boot. And on the morning of my own abortion, I was
feeling a little extra righteous. After years of posturing and
sloganeering, I finally had an opportunity to demonstrate my core
beliefs — like a rite of
passage.
Or a
sacrament.
And in the 27 years
since Roe vs. Wade, isn't that what it's now become? Consider the
sacred ground around abortion temples, free speech suspended so as
not to hinder partaking of the ritual within and abortion providers
occupying pedestals for their noble efforts. Heretics dare not
blaspheme by calling a fetus a baby or what happens to it murder.
And as though in the grip of a state religion, the media use only
sanctioned terms: pro-choice, reproductive rights, products of
conception.
Consider: While every
other political group is permitted to baptize itself and demonstrate
publicly, those who call themselves pro-life are branded by the
media anti-abortion extremists and charged with
racketeering.
But who's extreme?
For all the left's vaunted respect for multiculturalism,
pro-abortion evangels — like missionaries of old — spend vast
amounts of time, energy and taxpayer money crusading into the Third
World to bring the "good news" of "family planning" to primitives
whose backward belief systems stand in the way of their salvation.
Like religious zealots arriving on your doorstep when what you
really need is an ambulance, they rush to ravaged lands such as
Kosovo with abortion kits aplenty for those in dire need of more
life-sustaining commodities such as medicine, food and
water.
And what about here at home?
In the United States, according to the very pro-abortion Alan
Guttmacher Institute, 34 million abortions took place from 1973 to
1996. That's a million and a half per year. Who knows what genius
men and women were whooshed away from our midst and with them what
art, what music, what inventions, what
cures.
How about it, sisters?
Especially those of you who rode the crest of the second wave with
me: Did you ever dream that this was where we were headed? Did you
ever dream we would call a politician a friend to women — no matter
how flagrantly he exploited them — as long as he continued to back
abortion on demand? Did you ever dream we would enter the realms of
denial required to condone a procedure in which a perfectly viable
infant is pulled feet first through the birth canal until all but
her head is exposed, then stabbed in the skull to suck out her
brains, delivered dead and sold to the highest bidder for body
parts?
That's "a certain type of
late-term procedure," according to modern feminists, who have
twisted themselves like pretzels to pretend the dream did not turn
into a nightmare.
Perhaps it's time
to wake up and slap some cold water on our faces. Time to stop the
hypocrisy, to sever the ideals of feminism — dignity for women,
equal status, equal opportunity, equal pay — from what has become a
religious devotion to death.
We
should have listened to our mothers — the feminist ones, that
is.
Susan B. Anthony, now featured
on our currency, wasn't thinking of political correctness when she
referred to abortion as "child murder." Nor when she wrote: "No
matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from
suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who
commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life, it will
burden her soul in death; but oh, thrice guilty is he who drove her
to the desperation which impelled her to the
crime!"
Elizabeth Cady Stanton,
with her anti-slavery perspective, wrote, "When we consider that
women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we
should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see
fit."
Mattie Brinkerhoff said:
"When a man steals to satisfy hunger, we may safely conclude that
there is something wrong in society — so when a woman destroys the
life of her unborn child, it is an evidence that either by education
or circumstances she has been greatly
wronged."
Think that one over next
time you're standing in line at the grocery store — as I was
recently — and overhear a teen-age girl nonchalantly discussing with
a friend the abortion she's having
tomorrow.
Some legacy.
Barbara Curtis is an author, freelance writer and mother of many, including two through adoption. She welcomes your mail and comments at her website
Back to DA*DI's Home
| Copyright
(c) 1999 News World Communications, Inc. Reprinted with permission from The Washington Times. No further republication without copyright owner's permission. Visit our website at http://www.washtimes.com |
Dads Against the Divorce Industry