Archive for 1970

Prior to Roe, Abortion Legalization by State (1960’s and 1970’s)

Posted in Abortion History, Abortion legalization by state with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on September 5, 2018 by saynsumthn

Researched by: Carole Novielli

Prior to the infamous Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that forced abortion on the nation, abortion was illegal in a majority of states, except to save the life of the mother. At that time the decriminalization of abortion was left up to states to decide.

Laws legalizing abortions by state began in the late 1960’s as follows:

1966: Mississippi allows abortion for rape

In 1966, Mississippi altered its existing abortion law by adding rape as an indication for hospital abortion, according to the CDC’s first abortion surveillance report in 1969.

Image: State Laws Abortion (Image credit: CDC 1969)

State Laws Abortion (Image credit: CDC 1969)

1967: Colorado becomes first state to decriminalize abortion further, followed by North Carolina and California

On April 25, 1967, Colorado became the first state in the U.S. to decriminalize abortion, along the lines proposed by the American Law Institute (ALI.) The bill was introduced by then Representative Richard D. Lamm. According to the Associated Press:

“On April 25, 1967, Colorado became the first state to allow abortion for reasons other than rape or an imminent threat to a woman’s health. The bill passed a Republican-controlled Legislature with bipartisan support and was signed into law by Republican Gov. John Love despite strong objections from many constituents…Love said the new law requires that abortions be performed only in accredited hospitals and that each operation must have the unanimous consent of a special three-man board of physicians… Colorado law previously allowed abortions only in cases presenting a severe threat to the physical health of the mother or in pregnancies resulting from forcible rape. The new law permits the ending of pregnancies presenting a severe threat to the health — mental or physical — of the mother. It allows the termination of pregnancies resulting from incest or from any of the classifications of rape — including statutory rape.”

Image: 1967 Colorado legalizes abortion

1967 Colorado legalizes abortion

According to a report by the New York Times, in 1966, only 50 abortions were committed in the state and permitted if the mother’s life was endangered. In the first 14 months of legalization, more than half of the abortions were reported for reasons of “mental health” and only 32 for “medical reasons.”

Abortions rose in Colorado over the years as follows:

  • 1967 (last half of year) – 140
  • 1968 – 500
  • 1969 – 946

In May of 1967, North Carolina liberalized its abortion statutes, similar to the Colorado law.

Image: 1967 North Carolina liberalizes abortion laws

1967 North Carolina liberalizes abortion laws

In June of 1967, the California legislature also passed abortion law reforms. The law was signed by then Governor Ronald Reagan on June 14, 1967. The so-called Therapeutic Abortion Act took effect November 8, 1967 and restricted abortion after the 20th week of pregnancy.

Image: 1967 California liberalizes abortion laws

1967 California liberalizes abortion laws

According to the National Review, there were 518 abortions reported in the state that same year, and the New York Times reports that by the first half of 1968, 2,035 legal abortions were reported. A separate New York Times report states that by 1969, 14,000 abortions were reported. Sadly, the National Review claims that by the end of Reagan’s remaining years as Governor, the number of abortions would soar to an annual average of 100,000. Reagan later admitted that abortion had been “a subject I’d never given much thought to.”  

By 1971, a state appeals court ruled that all abortions could be legal in the state of California.

Reagan biographer Lou Cannon claims this was “the only time as governor or president that Reagan acknowledged a mistake on major legislation.” Reagan’s longtime adviser and Cabinet secretary Bill Clark called the incident “perhaps Reagan’s greatest disappointment in public life.”

Ronald Reagan went on to become the most pro-life president the US has had since the legalization of abortion through the Roe v. Wade decision.

1968: Georgia and Maryland become fourth and fifth states to legalize abortion

In 1968, Georgia became the fourth state to legalized abortion. The bill passed the House 144 to 11 and the Senate 39 to 11.

Image: 1968 Georgia legalizes abortion

1968 Georgia legalizes abortion

Maryland also passed a similar law that same year.

1969: Arkansas, Delaware, Kansas, New Mexico, and Oregon pass abortion legislation

By 1969, twelve states in addition to Colorado and California had legalized abortion, most for very restrictive reasons, according to the Willkes. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) issued their first abortion surveillance report noting that in the same year, five states had passed new abortion legislation (Arkansas, Delaware, Kansas, New Mexico and Oregon) and 24 other states considered new bills.

According to the Abortion Surveillance Report Annual Summary 1969, published by the US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare… National Communicable Disease Center, “Oregon became the first state to follow the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology [ACOG], which makes the following allowance, “In determining whether or not there is substantial risk (to the woman’s physical or mental health), account may be taken for the mother’s total environment, actual or reasonably foreseeable. The other four states enacted laws based on the American Law Institute Penal Code.”

Image: 1969 CDC and HEW report on states that legalized abortion

1969 CDC and HEW report on states that legalized abortion

In June of 1969, New Mexico liberalized its abortion law.

Image: 1969 New Mexico liberalizes abortion

1969 New Mexico liberalizes abortion

According to Jonathan B. Sutin:

“New Mexico’s 1969 abortion law… makes it unlawful for any person to produce an untimely interruption of a woman’s pregnancy with intent to destroy the fetus. Yet termination of the pregnancy is justified, under certain consensual and medical requirements, in the following instances:

  • The continuation of the pregnancy … is likely to result in the death of the woman or the grave impairment of the physical or mental health of the woman; or
  • The child probably will have a grave physical or mental defect, or
  • The pregnancy resulted from rape… or
  • The pregnancy resulted from incest.

According to the CDC, “In 1969, four of the nine states with recently changed abortion laws reported *12,417 legal abortions to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).” (*See end as numbers were later updated).

This same year, the Supreme Court of California rendered a decision in the case of People vs. Belous, which, according to the CDC, invalidated the pre-1967 California abortion law and raised the issue of constitutionality of state abortion statutes. Also in 1969, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia decided on the case of Dr. Milan Vuitch, a Washington abortionist indicted for illegal abortions. The court ruled that the State’s law labeling abortion as a felony was unconstitutional.

Image: 1969 CDC Judicial Decisions affecting abortion

1969 CDC Judicial Decisions affecting abortion

Next, we will detail abortion legalization by state in the 1970’s.

1970: New York, Washington, Hawaii, and Alaska legalize abortion

In 1970, eleven states, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Maryland, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon and South Carolina, had reform laws similar to the ALI’s Model Penal Code. And, according to Time.com, “four more lifted all abortion restrictions — New York, Washington, Hawaii and Alaska — before 1970.”

By 1970, more than *180,000 legal abortions were reported to the CDC from 19 states and the District of Columbia, according to the Abortion Surveillance Report published that year. (*See end as numbers were later updated).

The following table shows reported legal abortions for 14 states and the District of Columbia:

Image: 1970: CDC reported abortions in 14 states plus DC.

1970: CDC reported abortions in 14 states plus DC.

In April of 1970, New York decriminalized abortion (by one vote) up to the 24th week. The law went into effect on July 1st.

Image: 1970 New York legalizes abortion CDC

1970 New York legalizes abortion CDC

At that time, the state had a Republican Governor and Republicans controlled both Houses of the legislature, according to the New York Times. During the debate to liberalize abortion in New York in 1970, the false claim that thousands of  women died annually from unsafe abortions one representative to change his vote on the floor, opening the door to abortion on demand in New York.

More states followed: South Carolina, Virginia, Kansas, Washington

An American Law Institute (ALI) type law became effective in South Carolina on January 27, 1970 and Virginia on June 27, 1970.

Although Kansas passed its abortion reform law in 1969, it did not become effective until July 1, 1970. In March of 1970, Hawaii changed its law on abortion allowing for no restrictions on the reasons why a woman might obtain an abortion. Shortly thereafter Alaska followed suit and their law became effective on July 29, 1970.

Image: 1970 states that liberalized abortion laws CDC

Washington State’s abortion law change was enacted by a referendum held during the November 1970 general elections and went into effect December 3, 1970, according to the CDC.

Also on March 17, 1970, a woman by the name of Norma McCorvey  signed affidavit challenging the Texas law on abortion. Oral arguments in that case were heard before a  three judge district court in Dallas in May of that same year. By June, the court ruled the Texas statute unconstitutional, opening up the challenge that led to the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision in 1973.

1971: 24 states plus Washington, D.C., liberalize abortion laws – and abortions nearly triple

In 1971, *480,259 abortions were reported to the Center for Disease Control from 24 states and the District of Columbia. (*See end as numbers were later updated).

 

Image: 1971 reported number of legal abortions to CDC

1971 reported number of legal abortions to CDC

At this time 79.2% of all legal abortions were performed on White women and 18.9% were performed on Black women or women of other races, according to the CDC’s 1971  Abortion Surveillance Report.

Image: 1971 reported number of legal abortions to CDC

1971 reported number of legal abortions to CDC

Although several states attempted to liberalize or change their abortion abortion statutes, most failed due in part to strong pro-life sentiment. Author and researcher Daniel K Williams reports:

In 1971, twenty-five states considered abortion legalization bills. Every one of them failed to pass. In 1972, the pro-life movement went on the offensive and began campaigning for measures to rescind recently passed abortion legalization laws and tighten existing abortion restrictions.

In 1971, several important court decisions were also rendered as follows:

  • Illinois: Doe v. Scott
  • North Carolina: Corkey v. Edwards
  • District of Columbia: United States v. Vuitch
  • Wisconsin: Babbitz v. McCann

1972: 27 states plus Washington D.C. have abortion laws on the books, and abortions are rising

By 1972, *586,760 legal abortions were reported to the CDC from 27 states and the District of Columbia. (*See end as numbers were later updated).

  • 75.7% were White
  • 22.6% were Black or other races
Image: 1972 reported abortions by state to CDC

1972 reported abortions by state to CDC

In 1972, the Supreme Court heard two cases, Roe v. Wade and the companion case Doe v. Bolton. The court, made up of nine male justices, ruled by a vote of seven to two to legalize abortion and released their decision on January 22, 1973.

Although Norma MCCorvey, the plaintiff in the Roe case claimed she was gang raped, and thus needed an abortion, she later recanted the claim admitting, “[I] made up the story that I had been raped to help justify my abortion.”

In 1995, Norma Joined pro-life movement.

Image: Roe in abortion case joins pro-life groups (Image credit: New York Times 8/11/1995)

Roe in abortion case joins pro-life groups (Image credit: New York Times 8/11/1995)

In like manner, Sandra Cano, a/k/a/ “Doe” in the companion case to Roe later claimed that she was unaware her name had been used in this case and that she never sought or had an abortion. 

Image: Sandra Cano was Doe in the Doe v Bolton Supreme Court abortion case

Sandra Cano was Doe in the Doe v Bolton Supreme Court abortion case

Cano told members of the media, “The case brought by my lawyer in the name of Mary Doe was a fraud upon the Supreme Court of the United States and the people of America. My mother and my lawyer wanted me to have an abortion. Not me.”

In 2003, Norma filed an unsuccessful motion to have Roe V. Wade overturned, it was denied in 2005.

*NOTE: In the 1973 CDC Surveillance Report, abortion numbers in previous years were updated as follows:

  • 1969: 22,670
  • 1970: 193,491
  • 1971: 485,816
  • 1972: 586,760
  • 1973: 615,831
Image: CDC Abortion Surveillance Report 1969 to 1973

Abortion stats by CDC prior to 1973

 

The following years abortions reported to the CDC, increased:

  • 1974: 763,476
  • 1975: 854.853
  • 1976: 988,267
  • 1977: 1,079,430
  • 1978: 1,157,776
  • 1979: 1,251,921
  • 1980: 1,297,606
Image: CDC Abortion numbers 1969 to 1980

CDC Abortion numbers 1969 to 1980

 

Alan Guttmacher (a man) pushed Planned Parenthood to perform abortions

Posted in Abortion History, Abortion prior to Roe, Alan F. Guttmacher, American Law Institute, Guttmacher, Illegal abortion, Planned Parenthood History, Planned Parenthood uses blacks with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 20, 2018 by saynsumthn

Past Planned Parenthood president instrumental in pushing to decriminalize abortion

This article is part of a series on the history of Planned Parenthood. Read parts one and two and four.

In reviewing the genesis of Planned Parenthood’s obsession with abortion, their founder Margaret Sanger’s views on forced sterilization and birth control, we’ve learned that it was actually under Alan F. Guttmacher’s presidency that abortion became part of Planned Parenthood’s mission. In the second part of this series, we gave some context to just how long Guttmacher had been pushing abortion prior to becoming a leader of Planned Parenthood. In part three, we will detail when Planned Parenthood publicly began to call for the legalization of abortion and began referring for the procedure.

In 1962, Guttmacher became president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) and shortly thereafter, he told a friend, “I have not had the fortitude” to present to PPFA the idea of promoting abortion. “I think I would have a tough time in getting them to take a stand” he said. Any open support for legal change, he said, according to author David J. Garrow, “is going to take a long time.”

In reality, it did not take long at all.

Image: Alan F Guttmacher

Alan F Guttmacher

Pushing the “health exceptions” and redefining “life of the mother”

Guttmacher had been an outspoken advocate of decriminalizing abortion for years, but he became especially obsessed with abortion while in New York, eventually serving (in 1968) on Governor Rockefeller’s commission to examine the abortion statute in the state and make recommendations for change. In comparing the abortion rate of New York hospitals, Guttmacher observed that more whites than minorities were having abortions, writing, “the ratio of therapeutic abortions per 1000 live births was 2.6 for whites, 0.5 for Negroes, and 0.1 for Puerto Ricans…. [D]iscrimination between ward and private patients and between ethnic groups served to aggravate my dissatisfaction with the status quo and led to my desire for the enactment of a new law.”

Image: Alan Guttmacher, 1973 (Image credit: WGBH)

Alan Guttmacher, 1973 (Image credit: WGBH)

Guttmacher was a Humanist who did not view the life of the child as equal to the woman. He can be credited with pushing the so-called “health exceptions” for abortion. “By defining ‘life’ to include mental well being… Guttmacher claimed that there were instances in which it was appropriate to protect a woman’s ‘life’ by taking the life of her fetus,” writes abortion historian Daniel K Williams:

“I don’t like killing,” Guttmacher stated in a public lecture in 1961.

“I don’t like to do abortions but as many of you probably fought in World War II and killed because you wanted to preserve something more important, I think a mother’s life is more important than a fetus.”

Guttmacher’s focus on abortion for health purposes might be attributed to his twin brother, Dr. Manfred Guttmacher, a psychiatrist who happened to be a member of the American Law Institute (A.L.I.). The two Guttmacher brothers were both activists in the first birth control clinic in Baltimore.

“I have great respect for the American Law Institute. My twin brother Manfred, also a physician, an authority on forensic psychiatry, is a member of this group. Because of our twinship, I was privileged to attend a closed meeting two years ago,”Guttmacher wrote in Babies by Choice or Chance, in 1961.

Image: Manfred Guttmacher US National Library of Medicine

Manfred Guttmacher (Image: US National Library of Medicine)

According to the University of Pennsylvania Law School, the ALI was founded in 1923 and was made up of a group of  judges, lawyers, and law professors, “to promote the clarification and simplification of the law and its better adaptation to social needs, to secure the better administration of justice and to encourage and carry on scholarly and scientific legal work.” It was the ALI’s Model Penal Code on abortion that was used in the infamous Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling that forced abortion on every state in the nation.

Guttmacher later described that closed meeting further in 1972:

 [O]n a Sunday afternoon in December, 1959 when Mr. Herbert Wechsler (Professor of Law at Columbia) unveiled his model abortion statute now called the A.L.I. bill. The recommended statute provided that a doctor would be permitted to perform an abortion:

(1) if continuation of pregnancy “would gravely impair the physical or mental health of the mother”;

(2) if the doctor believed “that the child would be born with grave physical or mental defects”; or

(3) if the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest.”

Image: article American Law Institute Model Penal Code on Abortion 1959

American Law Institute Model Penal Code on Abortion 1959

“The Wechsler abortion bill was passed by the Institute as part of the total revised penal code revealed to the public in 1962. Many, including myself, hailed it as the answer to the legal problems surrounding abortion, which had always been the doctors’ dilemma,”Guttmacher recounted, adding, “In 1967, Colorado, California, and North Carolina… and in 1968, Maryland and Georgia… all modified their respective statutes using the A.L.I. bill as the prototype.”

“Even though the A.L.I. Code had not yet been adopted by any state, its mere promulgation opened the medical profession’s eyes to the preservation of health as being a justification for abortion,” Guttmacher wrote.

The real reason for the abortion push: population control and eugenics

Guttmacher’s and Sanger’s views were very similar, as they were both vocal members of the eugenics community. Sanger once advocated that a woman should obtain a license to breed in order to have a child, while Guttmacher pushed the idea that “feeble-minded” and “unfit” persons should have abortions. He was, however, clever enough to say that these were to be voluntary measures, despite a history of force within the population control movement.

As author Donald T. Critchlow explained in his book, “Intended Consequences,” “Within Planned Parenthood… population control advocates found a prominent place. Thus, Planned Parenthood maintained its position of promoting birth control as a woman’s right, but it joined other groups in lobbying for family planning as a means of controlling the rate of population growth.”

Image: Babies by Choice or By Chance, by Alan F Guttmcher

Babies by Choice or By Chance, by Alan F Guttmcher

In his 1959 book, “Babies by Choice or by Chance,” Guttmacher writes:

It is my belief that it should be permissible to abort any pregnancy in which there is high likelihood of injury to the health of the mother, or one in which there is a strong probability of an abnormal or malformed infant. In addition, the quality of the parents must be taken into account. Feeble-mindedness, in the mother in particularly, and her ability to care for a child should be evaluated. Pregnancy occurring from proved rape, and pregnancy in a child less than sixteen serves no useful purpose. Further, chronic moral turpitude which unfits humans as parents, such as drug addiction or chronic alcoholism, if declared incurable, should furnish ground for pregnancy interruption.

On December 4, 1967, Guttmacher appeared on a panel at Harvard Law School to discuss which types of people Hospitals should approve for abortions. He admitted:

“… I would abort mothers already carrying three or more children…. I would abort women who desire abortion who are drug addicts or severe alcoholics…. I would abort women with sub-normal mentality incapable of providing satisfactory parental care…”(Source; “Abortion: The Issues”, Dr. Alan Guttmacher – President, Planned Parenthood, December 4, 1967, Harvard Law School Forum)

Lying about motives… and about illegal abortion deaths

Abortion was strategically pushed on the nation, as Live Action News has previously reported, through lies and deceptions on the numbers of women who died from illegal abortions. And yet, a 1967 article in the Harvard Crimson quoted Alan Guttmacher speaking at the Harvard Law School Forum, admitting that most abortions prior to legalization were performed by “reputable physicians” – something that was downplayed as advocates pushed legal abortion as being safer than illegal abortion:

Seventy per cent of the illegal abortions in the country are performed by reputable physicians, each thinking himself a knight in white armor.

At the same event, Guttmacher asked for liberalization of abortion laws, but according to a report published by the Harvard Crimson, not for outright repeal. He said, “To allow abortion on demand would relegate man to the status of the bull.”

The next year, in 1968, Guttmacher founded the Center for Family Planning Program Development, a “special affiliate” of Planned Parenthood, later renamed The Alan Guttmacher Institute. The organization, according to their website, was “originally housed within the corporate structure of Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA).” In a speech he made in July of 1969, Guttmacher acknowledged that funding for his Institute came from grants “from the Kellogg, Rockefeller, and Ford Foundations as well as several other lesser  foundations.” Some of these same organizations had been funding eugenics for years.

Image: article headline on Guttmacher

Alan Guttmacher sees abortion as necessary 1968

In April 1969, Guttmacher suggested adding a clause to permit abortion in New York for any woman over 40 years of age, but it was voted down. He also believed that “abortion statutes should be entirely removed from the criminal code.”

“Family planning” not welcomed by minorities

Guttmacher called abortion “family planning,” and, in that same July 1969 speech, he pushed the decriminalization of abortion, saying, “It is time that we come to grips with two methods of family planning which we have a tendency to skip over in this country. One is abortion. I doubt that any of you is satisfied with the archaic, punitive, medieval law which now exists in your state and in mine which permits abortion to be done only to preserve the life of the mother. Almost all realize that liberalization of the abortion law is absolutely essential to permit the practice of good, honest medicine, not hypocritical medicine, but honest medicine. The question is how extensively should we liberalize the law.”

Image: article

Guttmacher calls abortion family planning 1969

The problem they had was that the very people which Sanger and her eugenics boards (and Guttmacher with his abortion advocacy push) targeted, the Black community, viewed birth control and abortion to be genocidal efforts to limit the growth of the Black race. And Planned Parenthood had noticed that their own minority patients had been on the decline. “Figures for ethnicity only go back to 1964 when 47% of the total patients were nonwhite. This dropped to 39% five years later in 1968,” Guttmacher stated.

Image: article Guttmacher speaks about Blacks in 1969

Guttmacher speaks about Blacks in 1969

Guttmacher acknowledged this in his speech:

“In addition, we must take full cognizance of the fact that our work among some militant minority groups is considered genocidal. They charge that what we are doing is not really trying to give a better family life to the less privileged segments of the community but trying to retard the numerical growth of ethnic minorities. This was first brought to my attention five or six years ago when I was lecturing at the University of California. For the first time in a long life I was picketed, and this fascinated me. I was picketed by a group called EROS, so I went down and chatted with the pickets who were very intelligent-looking black men. EROS means Endeavor to Raise Our Size…. They protested the work of PPWP as a form of genocide.”

Image: article Racism seen as denting Birth Control 1966

Racism seen as denting Birth Control 1966

Black suspicions ran even higher, when during a 1969 White House conference on food, nutrition and health, Guttmacher again unashamedly pushed for the decriminalization of abortion.

Fannie Lou Hamer

His statements, along with comments by others at the conference, were supposed to be aimed at helping the poor with food, but, instead, he was pushing population control. This alarmed Black activists like Fannie Lou Hamer, who, the night before the conference ended, issued a scathing attack on Guttmacher and others of like mind, according to a report filed on December 20, 1969, by the The Free Lance-Star. The paper quoted the noted civil rights activist as denouncing voluntary abortion, calling it “legalized murder,” making it clear that “she regards it as a part of a comprehensive white man’s plot to exterminate the Black population of the United States.”

The paper then went on to defend Guttmacher’s eugenic motives as “humanitarian.”

Image: article

Media spins Black concerns about Guttmacher push for abortion

A January 28, 1966, internal memo from Alan Guttmacher and Fred Jaffe acknowledged that Planned Parenthood was aware of how the Black community viewed abortion. The memo outlined the plan for winning over the Black community, calling for a “Community Relations Program” to “form a liaison between Planned Parenthood and minority organizations.” The plan, according to Planned Parenthood, would emphasize that “all people have the opportunity to make their own choices,” rather than, as the memo states, exhortation telling them how many children they should have.”

Image: article Black community charges genocide from abortion

Black community charges genocide from abortion

One way to get the message out, according to the memo, is to “get assistance from black organizations like The Urban League and the AME church,” and to employ “more Negro staff members on PP-WP [Planned Parenthood-World Population] and Affiliate’s staff, as well as recruit more Negro members for the National Board – at least 5.”

Planned Parenthood approves abortion advocacy

A few short years later, in 1968, Planned Parenthood did just that. Coincidentally, the move to add more Black board members came at the same time that the organization unanimously approved a policy recognizing abortion and sterilization as proper medical procedures.

According to the New York Times, “It called for liberalizing the criminal laws that prohibit them.”

Image: article Planned Parenthood uses Black man to push abortion (Image: New York Times 1968)

Planned Parenthood uses Black man to push abortion (Image: New York Times 1968)

At that same meeting, Planned Parenthood elected the first Black board chairman as the face to push this new abortion agenda — Dr. Jerome H. Holland, who, according to the NYT, “pledged his support for the group’s program saying that those who call birth control a form of genocide are ‘not aware of the real meaning of family planning and its uses.’”

Guttmacher expressed pleasure that “the group had taken a positive stand on ‘the necessity to liberalize abortion and sterilization statutes,’” adding that abortion should never be used as birth control. The recommendation affirmed by the 100-member board had originated from Planned Parenthood’s medical advisory committee, which Guttmacher had been part of. That committee had held:

“[I]t was the right and responsibility if every woman to decide whether and when to have a child…

“The committee recommended the abolition of existing laws and criminal laws regarding abortion and the recognition that advice, counseling and referral constituted an integral part of medical care…It recommended also that Planned Parenthood centers offer appropriate information and referral,” the NYTs reported.

The board then took Guttmacher’s advice to stress “voluntarism” with regard to legalizing abortion as the best way to reduce population.

Image: Planned Parenthood first calls for legalizing abortion 1968 (Image: New York Times)

Planned Parenthood first calls for legalizing abortion 1968 (Image: New York Times)

Planned Parenthood first calls for legalizing abortion 1968 (Image: New York Times)

“After this plank was approved in 1969,” writes Larry Lader in “Abortion II,” “PP chapters soon started abortion referrals, and even clinics, as ‘an integral part of medical care.’”

Planned Parenthood refers for abortions 

In fact, by 1970, Planned Parenthood of New York had announced according to the New York Times, “a citywide abortion information and referral service would be in operation on July 1, when the state’s new abortion law takes effect. The service will advise women on abortions and refer them to doctors and hospitals willing and able to perform the operations.”

Image: Planned Parenthood announces they will be referring for abortion June 1970

Planned Parenthood announces they will be referring for abortion June 1970

That same year, Guttmacher added, “We look forward to the time when our clinics can be closed, when the government can fund enough money to serve the poor and research new birth control methods.”

In our next article in this series, we will discuss Planned Parenthood’s first abortion facility, which did not open until 1970, and will detail Alan Guttmacher’s role in the idea of stand-alone abortion facilities, revealing how abortion came to be seen as the ultimate method of population control.

    • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Responding to AHA’s claim pro-lifers focus on “abortion hurts women”

Posted in AHA, Pro-life History with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 30, 2015 by saynsumthn

This past weekend a debate between pro-life advocate Gregg Cunningham vs. Abolish Human Abortion advocate T. Russell Hunter took place in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

11164806_881842688548413_8953565359761892780_n

____________________________

The purpose was for each one to defend their view on abortion strategy: Incrementalism vs. Immediatism.

I am not going to address the entire debate in this blog post.

For those interested, pro-life blogger, Jill Stanek has analyzed the debate in a series of blog posts here which I recommend.

The purpose of this blog post is to address two statements made by Hunter.

Gregg Russell prolife vs AHA abortion Debate

During the debate, Hunter makes claims that pro-life strategy of working towards complete abolition of abortion and accepting gradual or incremental methods to save every baby possible along the way is sin.

Then Hunter implies that pro-life people do not call the sinner to repent for abortion. This is one of the statement’s I wish to address here.

Hunter says, “You notice the difference between an immediatist and an incrementalist, in that an immediatists says abortion is sin turn to God and goes out daily and to that work.” (Note: The last three words of Hunter’s statement are hard to make out from the audio, but I think I caught them correctly, please notify me if I am incorrect.)

TR Debate AHA

Hunter ran through his points so quickly that I believe that they are worth reviewing. Let’s pause there for a moment and analyze what Hunter is implying.

The comments begin at 58:29 of the debate video – here if you want to hear them.

First the statement, “an immediatists says abortion is sin turn to God” is intentionally designed to imply that anyone who claims the name “pro-life” and supports “incremental” strategies does not believe that abortion is sin or proclaim that society needs to turn to God.

This is an utterly ignorant and rather insulting statement.

The pro-life movement is made up of a large number of Bible believing Christian people. I would be in that group.

I understand the ignorance of a person who only recently joined the fight to end abortion while claiming to be a Christian for many years. But, just because Hunter and many of his followers have decided to responded to the Biblical mandate to “rescue those being led to the slaughter” does not mean history on this movement began with them.

As much as Hunter would like to re-write the history of the pro-life movement he did not live it as many many pro-lifers did and can now testify as first hand witnesses.

But to the point at hand, there is ample evidence past and present that the call to repentance was and is given within the pro-life community.

This 2001 letter to the editor is just one example:

US Repent 2001 abortion

_______________________________________________

The 1980’s rescues were also public calls for not only the church to repent from abortion apathy, but also for society to do the same. No AHA meme, statement, or fancy design can erase that history.

225488_174509399274400_7414355_n

___________________________________

Moving on…

The second part of Hunter’s statement which I’d like to address is as follows:

    Incrementalists say things like abortion hurts women. It does. But the focus is on, it hurts women not abortion kills babies, even though they recognize that abortion kills babies.”

Again- that is a preposterous statement.

Abortion Hurts Women Debate

The very images collected by the pro-life community, which Hunter now uses in all his effective social media memes, is proof that the focus is on the fact that abortion kills babies.

In addition, I have also documented that pure legislation to defend the preborn and outlaw all abortions was put forth via Human Life Amendments during the early days. That documentation can be found here.

Having said that, there is nothing wrong with saying that abortion hurts women. Hunter, for all his protesting, admits it in fact does. Is not truth- truth?

I will give Hunter the benefit of the doubt on this topic because again, the AHA leader chose to get into this fierce fight after abortion had been legal for a number of years, so he is rather ignorant of historical battles, ideas, and lies that the pro-life community has had to dismantle for the past 42 years.

Those who are new to the abortion battle may not realize that the abortion lobby made major inroads by painting illegal abortion as “unsafe” causing women to die.

It is simple logic to counter the lie that helped legalize abortion with the truth, which is that women still die from abortion and legalization does not necessarily make abortions safe.

Keep abortion safe and legal

The lies:

NARAL Pin

    Millions of women died from illegal abortions.

    If you make abortions illegal, women will die.

Case in point, during the debate to liberalize abortion in New York, the issue of unsafe abortions swayed one representative to change his vote on the floor, opening the door to abortion on demand in that state.

NY Constance Cook

Assemblywoman Constance E. Cook stood to the floor during that 1970 debate to push the lie of unsafe abortion, stating, “I submit that we have abortion on demand in the state of New York right now. Any woman that wants an abortion can get one–if she has $25, she has it done here, under the most abominable circumstances,” and that prohibition only drives abortion underground.”

This clip from the film “Choice at Risk” gives a historical glimpse :

Repealing Abortion Laws (4:18) from Dorothy Fadiman on Vimeo.

The deciding vote was cast by Democrat Assemblyman, George Michaels, who told the LA Times that for years he had been told by local party leaders not to vote for the repeal of the abortion ban, and he pledged not to. For two years he had followed the party line.

ASSY George Michaels cast vote to legalize abortion

    I would vote no, hoping the bill would pass,” he said. “I was not doing the right thing.”

    In April, 1970, the night before he left for Albany, Michaels spent an evening with his daughter-in-law, Sarah.

    Sarah asked him what would happen when the abortion bill came up for a vote again. There was a chance it would pass, he told her.

    What if it doesn’t?” she asked.

    Maybe next year,” he said.

    Michaels says he has never been able to forget what his son’s young wife told him next:

    In the meantime, thousands of women will be mutilated and die because of that stupid Legislature.

    Boy, that rocked me,” Michaels says. “That rocked me.”

The National Abortion Rights Action League, NARAL, also lied about women dying from illegal abortions. One of their early founders, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, who later repented of his pro-abortion actions and views, described what they did early on:

Bernard Nathanson

    “We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal, enlightened, sophisticated one,” recalls the movement’s co-founder. “Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls. We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60 percent of Americans were in favor of permissive abortion. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority. We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000, but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000.”

McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence, Robert P. George breaks it down further when he writes this about the NARAL founder:

    Nathanson and his friends lied—relentlessly and spectacularly—about the number of women who died each year from illegal abortions. Their pitch to voters, lawmakers, and judges was that women are going to seek abortion in roughly equal numbers whether it is lawful or not. The only effect of outlawing it, they claimed, is to limit pregnant women to unqualified and often uncaring practitioners, “back alley butchers.” So, Nathanson and others insisted, laws against abortion are worse than futile: they do not save fetal lives; they only cost women’s lives.

abortion-rally-1970s

For clarification, stats show that, in the year prior to Roe, the CDC disputed the lie that thousands of women died from illegal abortion as shown in this table from their surveillance report on abortion.

cdc-illegal-abortion-deaths

So, to summarize, just because Hunter says that the pro-life movement does not focus on “abortion kills babies” does not make it so.

When the pro-life community documents that abortion is not safe for women it does not automatically mean they do not focus on the fact that abortion kills babies. For many of us, we are able to articulate multiple facts.

In addition, because AHA leaders claim that pro-lifers do not call abortion sin, does not make the claim true either as I stated above.

However, in my personal study of scripture, I do not see every effort to dialogue or convey truth being preceded by the command “repent.”

King Solomon, himself was conflicted when he was forced to determine who the mother of a baby brought before him was. He did not tell the two women squabbling to repent of their actions. Instead the wise King appealed to the heart of the true mother:

The NIV version of the events in I Kings is detailed below:

    The king said, “This one says, ‘My son is alive and your son is dead,’ while that one says, ‘No! Your son is dead and mine is alive.’”

    Then the king said, “Bring me a sword.” So they brought a sword for the king. 25 He then gave an order: “Cut the living child in two and give half to one and half to the other.”

    The woman whose son was alive was deeply moved out of love for her son and said to the king, “Please, my lord, give her the living baby! Don’t kill him!”

    But the other said, “Neither I nor you shall have him. Cut him in two!”

    Then the king gave his ruling: “Give the living baby to the first woman. Do not kill him; she is his mother.”

In the story above, the true mother, the one who cared for and loved the baby, was willing to compromise to save her child’s life.

Think about that for a while, as you ponder the debate !

News footage 1970: NY legalizes abortion

Posted in Abortion in the news, Abortion Vintage, Illegal abortion with tags , , , on July 30, 2014 by saynsumthn

The NY Times reports that, Former Democrat Assemblyman George M. Michaels, who cast the deciding vote to liberalize New York’s abortion law in 1970, thereby ending his political career has died.

    Michaels favored abortion but voted against the law twice at the behest of the Cayuga County Democratic Committee. He did so at the beginning of April 1970 when the bill went down to a narrow defeat.

    But on April 9, he realized that the measure was doomed without his support. He rose to take the microphone, his hands trembling. “I realize, Mr. Speaker, that I am terminating my political career, but I cannot in good conscience sit here and allow my vote to be the one that defeats this bill,” he declared. “I ask that my vote be changed from ‘no’ to ‘yes.‘ “

The deciding vote was cast by Assemblyman, George Michaels who told the LA Times that for years he had been told by local Democrat party leaders not to vote for the repeal of the abortion ban, and he pledged not to. For two years he had followed the party line.

ASSY George Michaels cast vote to legalize abortion

    I would vote no, hoping the bill would pass,” he said. “I was not doing the right thing.”

    In April, 1970, the night before he left for Albany, Michaels spent an evening with his daughter-in-law, Sarah.

    Sarah asked him what would happen when the abortion bill came up for a vote again. There was a chance it would pass, he told her.

    What if it doesn’t?” she asked.

    Maybe next year,” he said.

    Michaels says he has never been able to forget what his son’s young wife told him next:

    In the meantime, thousands of women will be mutilated and die because of that stupid Legislature.

    Boy, that rocked me,” Michaels says. “That rocked me.”

    Michaels returned to Albany still not knowing how he would vote, he says. “I was hoping somebody would switch; that it wouldn’t be George Michaels.”

    The vote was taken. Michaels voted against the repeal. Then, just before the clerk announced the vote, he stood up and asked the Speaker to change his vote.

    “When it came to a tie vote, I could not go through that charade any longer,” he said. “I knew my career was finished.”

It wasn’t courageous. There was no courage there at all. I had to win back the respect of my family. I had to win back their respect,” Michaels said.