file: /pub/resources/text/ProLife.News/1992: pln-0212.txt --------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Life Communications - Volume 2, No. 12 July, 1992 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This newsletter is intended to provide articles and news information to those interested in Pro-Life Issues. Questions to readers and articles for submissions are strongly encouraged. All submissions should be sent to the editor, Steve (frezza@ee.pitt.edu). ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) M.A.D. Act out of committee The so-called Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA, HR. 25, S. 25) has passed out of committee and will be presented on the house floor at any time (perhaps it has already). This bill would invalidate virtually any restriction on abortion. It would require that all states establish the right of a woman to have an abortion for any reason prior to 'viability' and for "health reasons" up to birth. It is claimed that this is simply a codification of the infamous "Roe vs. Wade" decision, but this goes far beyond Roe - it extends it. Please write or call your representatives, and urge them not to vote for this bill. Please ask all you know who are interested to do the same. Please write to: The Honorable [your representative's name] US House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (2) WRITE FOR LIFE Writing letters to politicians and to newspapers and magazines is an important part of pro-life work. Here are a few suggestions on how to do it effectively. Writing letters to editors is very important. Many people read letters columns, and you can get across facts and ideas that they probably will not see in the news pages. In general a short letter dealing with one point is more likely to be printed than a long letter dealing with several points. You should never think that you are wasting your time if your letters are not printed. At least one person at the newspaper reads every letter, so someone will see it and might be affected by it. More important, many newspapers print letters on controversial issues according to a formula. The percent- age of letters printed on either side reflects the percentage re- ceived on either side. Therefore, your unpublished pro-life letter may have helped get someone else's pro-life letter published, and getting pro-life ideas before the public is the purpose of writing. That's why although you should never send a letter you would be ashamed to have published over your name, you should not worry that you can't write a letter that would be "good enough." It may well be good enough to be published, and even if it isn't, it may help a better letter get published. Addresses of public officials are available in libraries. Addresses of your own local officials are easy to find. If you need the ad- dress of the governor of another state or someone like that, a good source is _The Almanac of American Politics._ Another source, which is in even more libraries, is _Who's Who in America._ (It uses a conventional form for governor's addresses that I don't like but they will get the mail where you want it.) Before I got a computer I kept a card file of addresses of public officials to whom I would write on various issues, not just abortion. Now I have a letters subdirectory in my computer. In it I have let- ters addressed to various officials and to various newspapers and magazines. The first time I had occasion to write to each after I set up the subdirectory I kept the letter. Now, when I want to write a letter I go into the appropriate file, change the date (Don't forget to do that!), delete everything between the salutation and the closing, and type my new message. - Marty Helgesen ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (3) BIG LIE EXPOSED Now that the Supreme Court has ruled on Pennsylvania's abortion laws pro-abortionists are claiming that it has destroyed Roe v. Wade. Unfortunately that claim is false. States still have no authority to forbid abortions. However, the pro-abortionists are conducting a major propaganda campaign. You are likely to see the claim that before abortion was legalized by the Supreme Court in 1973 thousands of women died every year from illegal abortions. That claim is a lie. Not everyone who repeats it is a liar, because some people have been taken in by it and sincerely but mistakenly believe it to be true, but it is a lie. _The American Journal of Public Health_ vol. 50, no. 7 (July, 1960) had an article, "Illegal Abortion as a Public Health Problem," by Mary Calderone, M.D., M.S.P.H., F.A.P.H.A., who was the medical director of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. In it she referred to a conference on abortion held in 1955, the proceedings of which were published under the title _Abortion in the United States_ edited by Mary S. Calderone (New York: Hoeber-Harper, 1958). Giving facts established by the conference she said, in the article, "Fact No. 3 -- Abortion is no longer a dangerous procedure. This applies not just to therapeutic abortions as performed in hospitals but also to so-called illegal abortions as done by physicians. In 1957 there were only 260 deaths in the whole country attributed to abortions of any kind. In New York City in 1921 there were 144 abortion deaths, in 1951 there were only 15; and while the abortion death rate was going down so strikingly in that 30-year period, we know what happened to the population and the birth rate. Two corollary factors must be mentioned here: first, chemotherapy and antibiotics have come in, benefiting all surgical procedures as well as abortion. Second, and even more important, the conference estimated that 90 per cent of all illegal abortions are presently being done by physicians. Call them what you will, abortionists or anything else, they are still physicians, trained as such; and many of them are in good standing in their communities. They must do a pretty good job if the death rate is as low as it is. Whatever trouble arises usually comes after self-induced abortions, which comprise approximately 8 per cent, or with the very small percentage that go to some kind of non-medical abortionist." (p.949). She also said, "I ask you not to assume that I am indiscriminately for abortion. Aside from the fact that abortion is the taking of a life, I am also mindful of what was brought out by our psychiatrists -- that in almost every case, abortion, whether legal or illegal, is a traumatic experience that may have severe consequences later on." (p. 951) - Marty Helgesen ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (4) WANT TO SUPPORT REPUBLICANS FOR CHOICE? "'Republicans for Choice' has a TV spot ready to air which purports to be a public opinion poll, but is really a scam to raise money from pro-lifers to finance pro-abortion activities. The ad tells viewers to call one of two '900' phone numbers, depending on whether you are pro-life or pro-choice, and cleverly baits pro-lifers by attacking Phyllis Schlafly and Pat Robertson. The phone call costs $4.50, of which the pro-aborts will pocket about $3.00 per call. You are warned. Don't call!" - Marty Helgesen ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (5) ANOTHER GLAMOUROUS SURVEY Glamour Magazine wants to hear from pro-life women. From their July issue, they want to know: 1) Are you single, married or divorced? 2) Do you have children? 3) Do you practice a religion? 4) Do you usually vote? Are you registered with any party? 5) Tell us, in some detail, about your objections to abortion. Do you oppose it in all cases, or can you see exceptions (besides rape & incest)? 6) Do you believe the fetus is a person from the moment of conception? 7) How do you feel about the argument that the status of the fetus changes once it is capable of surviving outside the womb? 8) Are the arguments black and white, or is negotiation possible? 9) What areas do you see as points of discussion? 10) Is the right to abortion best decided by the courts? Or do you think voters should decide, on a state-by-state basis? 11) Did you ever have an unwanted pregnancy? 12) Did you consider abortion? Did you ever have one? 13) If you continued, did you keep the child or arrange an adoption? 14) Where do you stand on sex education in the schools? 15) Do you think high school students should be encouraged to use condoms? 16) Do you oppose contraception as well as abortion? 17) Do you think people who are pro-life should try to help women who continue an unplanned pregnancy? 18) Have you ever tried to help someone in that situation? If so, how? Please send responses to : Are You Pro-Life ? Glamour 350 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10017 Fax (212) 880-6922 -Steve Chaney ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (6) Numbers, Numbers.... A Half Million Here? The National Organization for Women's April 5 pro-abortion rally drew 500,000 people, the networks reported based on a D.C. police estimate. But the U. S. Park Police, whose counts are usually used by the media, released their estimate a day late: 250,000. But some reporters ignored the count even after its release. On the April 6 NBC Nightly News, reporter Bob Kur asserted: "This year, with freedom to choose threatened as never before, yesterday there were more marchers than ever before: half a million." (The April 27 Newsweek called it "one of the largest mass demonstrations in this country's history.") [Ed's note: The Park Police reported that 300,000 attended the 1989 abortion-rights march. They estimated that 200,000 attended the 1990 Rally for Life. The official who made the Rally for Life estimate said that, using similar techniques of estimation, he would have put the 1989 number at 75,000.] -Ed Gehringer - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Quote Of the Month: "The state-constructed propaganda about fetal development attempts to limit what the women considers in her abortion decision and to persuade her that the developing fetal body is somehow the most important consideration in what is truly a complex personal, social, and economic decision with widespread impact on the lives of other family members as well as the woman herself." - Nancy Felipe Russo, Professor of Psychology & Women's Studies, Arizona State University +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Credits: | | 1 - From the "UFL Pro Vita", newsletter of University Faculty for | | Life, Washington DC, volume II number 2 May, 1992. | | write to: Box 2273 Georgetown University, Washington DC 20057. | | 4 - From the newsletter of the Republican National Coalition for | | Life, P. O. Box 618, Alton, IL 62002 | | 5 - From the Summer, 1992 issue of "Sisterlife" newsletter of | | Feminists For Life, 811 E. 47th Street, Kansas City, MO 64110 | | 6 - From Media Watch, May 1992, p. 7. | |QOM- From "Abortion and Unwanted Childbearing: The Impact of Casey" | | prepared for a Planned Parenthood press conference 6/29/92 in | | Phoenix, AZ. (I have a copy of the full text, including her | | bitnet address. - stf) | +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ Anyone desiring information on specific prolife groups, literature, tapes, or help with problems is encouraged to contact the editor.